The Upside Down Attack on Josh Treviño

[shira]

M.J. Rosenberg is a writer who—though himself of Jewish origin—regularly uses anti-Semitically loaded language to attack Israel and its defenders.

(See Commentary's Alana Goodman for a review of Rosenberg's record.)

Now he has a new target: Josh Treviño, co-founder of RedState.com and a newly hired columnist for the UK's Guardian newspaper. On hearing news of the hiring, Rosenberg tweeted: "Trevino is every Jew's nightmare.Protest to Guardian. Creepy white racist." And what is the affront that qualifies Treviño as "every Jew's nightmare"? His defense of Israel!

....

There are a lot of Jews in the universe defined by "every Jew," but there can't be many of us who regard our friends as "nightmares"—or who regard those who pander to anti-Semites as our friends or champions.

more...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/17/josh-trevino.html

What's interesting about this is the fact that both Trevino AND Glenn Greenwald were recently hired by the Guardian. It appears the Guardian felt it needed to 'balance' Greenwald's views on American foreign policy with some random rightwing idiot extremist whose sole purpose is to discredit any views that counter those of the extreme Left. Better that the Guardian commission rightwing idiots to oppose Greenwald than rational liberals and leftists.

But better yet are those who are outraged at Trevino's views who seemingly have no problem with Greenwald's views (whacky Israeli conspiracies, his incitement to kill Israelis @ his blog, his defense of neo-nazis like Matt Hale). A perfect case study of selective anti-racism.

[azurnoir]

1. and your take on this? do you support Trevino do you agree with David Frum? n/t

[shira]

2. If you read my comments, you'd see I don't support rightwing idiot hacks like Trevino...

As for David Frum, I think he makes a valid point about leftwing hypocrites against the likes of Trevino who pander to anti-semites and their conspiracy theories. But he misses the bigger point. Trevino isn't at the Guardian to write about the mideast, but only to counter Greenwald's take on American foreign policy. Team Palestine bozos seem oblivious to that as well.

[azurnoir]

3. I read your comments here frequently that is why I asked

so the answer is oh of course I don't support Trevino but...............

[shira]

4. Read more carefully. I think Greenwald's views are dangerous....

...and that the Guardian is playing games by countering his views with rightwing extremists like Trevino. There are many rational liberals/progressives who oppose his views. The Guardian wants its readership to believe that all those opposed to Greenwald are similar to bozos like Trevino. It's a game.

Here's a good article about Greenwald:

The Glenn Greenwald Some On The Left Don’t Know!
http://extremeliberal.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/the-glenn-greenwald-some-on-the-left-dont-know/

You're cool with Greenwald, aren't you?

[azurnoir]

5. yes I am "cool" with Greenwald

but I do not believe in silencing "people deemed dangerous liberals(leftists around here so as to keep it separate)

but don't stop now IMO your on a roll a very revealing one at that too, oh BTW were you aware that Greenwald is Gay? I find it kind of 'odd' that a liberal Gay Jewish commentator would be castigated in such a way

[shira]

6. His views are pretty rightwing/fascist on many issues....

I'm not for silencing anyone either as that's pretty McCarthyist IMO. But I'm all for exposing their twisted views.

So what's revealing about this roll I'm on?

And what does Greenwald being gay have to do with anything?

[azurnoir]

7. so explain what in your opinion some Greenwald's "twisted" views are

perhaps too you could expound for readers here what exactly was revealed in your link a couple of comments back

[oberliner]

13. Daily Kos: Glenn Greenwald’s stunningly superficial hate for Obama and admiration for Ron Paul

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/08/1052672/-Glenn-Greenwald-s-stunningly-superficial-hate-for-Obama-and-admiration-for-Ron-Paul

Maybe a good starting point?

[shaayecanaan]

14. Not really...

That article is simply an unsubstantiated spray. It contains two quotes from Greenwald, neither of which are even particularly contentious, let alone "dangerous". About the only specific allegation we get is that he linked to a video that was selectively quoted and manipulated.

[oberliner]

15. It's a good starting point

The gist is that he is anti-Obama and pro-Ron Paul.

That's a good beginner's guide to understanding where he is coming from.

Much easier piece to sort through the the usual "spray" coming from Greenwald.

Here's a full-on article of his if you'd rather:

http://www.salon.com/2011/12/31/progressives_and_the_ron_paul_fallacies/

Here's a choice quote:

Whatever else one wants to say, it is indisputably true that Ron Paul is the only political figure with any sort of a national platform — certainly the only major presidential candidate in either party — who advocates policy views on issues that liberals and progressives have long flamboyantly claimed are both compelling and crucial. The converse is equally true: the candidate supported by liberals and progressives and for whom most will vote — Barack Obama — advocates views on these issues (indeed, has taken action on these issues) that liberals and progressives have long claimed to find repellent, even evil.

<end of quotations>

In spite of his "I am not endorsing any candidate" pre-amble, it is pretty clear from those remarks (and the rest of the article) what he thinks (thought?) of Obama and Ron Paul.

To summarize Greenwald's take on things:

Ron Paul's views = compelling and crucial
Barack Obama's views = repellent and evil

[azurnoir]

19. what I ffind amusing here and why7 I am so willing to 'play'

is an article that roundly supports a Rightwinger such as Trevino is posted but suddenly the subject gets changed to Glen Greenwald when the OP is asked about it, "oh noes I posted an article about Trevino to condemn Greenwald" ah ha

[oberliner]

20. The OP has extensive commentary about Greenwald

In fact, it seems that the reason for posting it is specifically to raise those points.

[azurnoir]

24. well seeing as how the OP was able to find other articles

that condemned Greenwald why were those not posted rather than one that sung the praises of Trevino with condemnation of Greenwald as a side-bar? subtlety?

[oberliner]

25. You raise fair points

What's your take on the Greenwald/Trevino hirings at the Guardian?

Greenwald good, Trevino bad?

[azurnoir]

37. no both meh The Guardian is a national newspaper and as such should present both

sides of an issue

If there are any out there upset about Trevino it could be CIF Watch, as one would think his hiring would take some of the steam out of their engine

[oberliner]

38. It's actually a newspaper that is barely surviving

I believe the latest subscription numbers are 200K and falling fast.

Seems like these bizarre hirings illustrate that it may be in its death throes.

[azurnoir]

18. Interesting because the subject as outlined below from your link

Recently Obama signed off on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). A provision of this act would allow the military to hold American citizens accused of being terrorists indefinitely, which by any honest assessment is unconstitutional. Obama originally threatened to veto it, but backed off after Congress watered it down so that the President could use his authority to bypass military prosecution in favor of a civilian prosecution, which requires due process. President Obama issued a signing statement saying that he would never hold American citizens indefinitely; of course that has no bearing on future presidents.

got a very similar reaction here on DU in other words it was roundly condemned

[oberliner]

21. Ron Paul vs. Barack Obama

Most (and I do say most) posters/members of DU don't have to give that choice too much thought.

[azurnoir]

22. well you can attempt to make that the subject

however it seemed according to your Kos link to be more something else like the NDAA

[oberliner]

23. Fair enough

Let me just lay this out for you to bring it back to the OP:

I think they are both ridiculous.

Trevino is more loathsome - but Greenwald is also pretty bad (though I am sure he has some fans here).

The Guardian, though, does get a lot of equally out there folks posting on the Comment is Free portion of their website.

The crux of the matter is that the newspaper is in trouble and they are doing what they can to bring in more readers. This sort of thing tends to accomplish that, at least in the short run.

[shira]

26. You can read that link a few posts up about Greenwald....

Did you know that the same people calling for Trevino's blood aren't the least concerned about Greenwald's views? FTR, he supported Bush and his wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In the past month, he's written many articles bashing Obama; essentially doing Mitt Romney's bidding.

There's little point going any further with you. Someone who, for example, refuses to admit how dangerous and twisted Miles of Smiles is won't find anything twisted with Greenwald either.

[azurnoir]

29. yes indeed giving Gazans particularly children dental work is an evil deed alright

at least according to some but please will you enumerate some what your link said for those who missed it?

or was the Miles of Smiles thing an attempt at subject change?

[shira]

45. At least it's good to know you're cool with a Bush supporter....

...and Obama basher like Greenwald.

And Miles-of-Smiles is recognized as a terror organization by the USA. But you support them anyway b/c they allot only most of the charity they raise (not all) to terrorist causes.

Classy.

[azurnoir]

47. Glenn Greenwald is/was a supported of George W Bush?

lol where do you get this crap from, oh wait com'on let's see yet another linky proving beyond any doubt ........

as to Miles of Smiles they operate within the US too did you know that, I'm thinking not but there is a tenuous link between their operations in Gaza and InterPal so run with it

[King_David]

8. So what if he is Gay ?

Why would that have to be highlighted?

I do not get it !

[azurnoir]

9. Highlighted?

I mentioned it why do you seem to have a problem with that? should it have been kept secret?

[King_David]

10. It's just irrelevant

How is a persons sexual orientation relevant here ?

[oberliner]

12. He also lives in Brazil with his husband

But he does apparently come to the US more than occasionally.

[azurnoir]

16. you seem upset once again why?

you were quite adamant about Arafat being Gay (as proof he died of AIDS no less as if.....) a short while back so what is the difference here?

[King_David]

27. Really ??

Show me where I was 'adamant about Arafat being Gay'

LINK IT UP PLEASE.

You are obsessed.

[azurnoir]

28. okay, but be sure to explain what I am so "obsessed" about ?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113413235#post26

you also accuse me of homophobia because I asked why a rumor designed to elicit a homophobic response would be created in the first place

you obviously do not like the fact that I mentioned Greenwald is Gay but why? does it make you uncomfortable for some reason? I found it interesting because of the political asides here and the fact that one of the links that condemned Greenwald also had ProGay rights ads, it would seem that supporting Israel could be more important than supporting Gay rights and or Gay people themselves for some at least, or perhaps it was there as a disclaimer of sorts?

Tell us do you consider Greenwald one of your Gay brothers or do his views on Israel get in the way, they certainly seemed to when it came to Haneen Maikey

now I suspect there will be dash to alert button due to some of the comment or questions I asked you but alas there is no homophobia here simply a point in fact Glenn Greenwald is Gay and you are apparently upset I mentioned it, would you be so upset if it was someone else one who agrees more with your political views?

[King_David]

30. I see nowhere in that post anything to back up your "claim" nt

[azurnoir]

33. I would never have guessed that n/t

[King_David]

34. Nothing nt

[King_David]

31. "Gay brothers"??

You think gay people are homogeneous in their views ?

You don't get it do you?

Gay people are just like straight people.

Where do you get this from ?

[azurnoir]

32. you have made reference in the past to your Gay brother and sisters

sorry if that was not an all inclusive statement

but once again why are you pursuing this, what do you hope to gain, I am curious as to your motivatiomns?

[King_David]

35. Link it up

Why am i pursuing this gay " discussion "?
I never brought up this issue inappropriately ..

But I do defend Gay rights everywhere ..

[azurnoir]

36. right here

Last edited Tue Aug 21, 2012, 06:11 PM - Edit history (1)

King_David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Sep-29-11 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #104
146. Quite a few of my gay friends parents , brothers and sisters are settlers

I have been to quite a few of their houses and they do not hate their sons (or daughters)

So where did you get that information from


Oh yes...you made it up !

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=366616#366959

but then again the subject was settlers so I guess that's different, somehow?

seems you feel that my mentioning someone deemed an enemy of Israel is Gay to be " inappropriate"?why? does this somehow make you uncomfortable or what?

eta I am sorry that my mentioning Greenwald's orientation is somehow offensive, but as a well known journalist I would think that is something that should not be hidden or deemed unmentionable, but I guess I was wrong

[King_David]

39. Parents of and brothers of and sisters of

My gay friends ... Are not my "gay brothers"

Geez.. Dig ,dig ,dig... deeper

[azurnoir]

40. Quite a few of my gay friends parents , brothers and sisters are settlers

but if you did not mean what you said that's okay too

[King_David]

41. Sigh nt

[oberliner]

42. This is the greatest, most insightful discussion I've ever seen on this site

DU at its finest!

[azurnoir]

43. yep I thought so too

but then again I've seen quite a few those dogs and kennels around here lately

[oberliner]

44. Seen or participated in?

You seem to be in the mix for a lot of these fun exchanges.

[azurnoir]

46. yes it does seem that way

there was a memorable one where exception was taken to Reuters headline because it contained the word "Jewish"

[oberliner]

48. I am still surprised by your take on that one

I thought for sure you would agree with me considering your past comments, but that's neither here nor there.

[holdencaufield]

11. Make sure...

... from now on, you highlight when someone is openly straight as well -- for consistency's sake.

After all, we wouldn't want to keep any secrets.

[azurnoir]

17. do you really think that necessary ?

but once again I guess when we're trying so hard to condemn someone we shouldn't mention he's also a member of a minority

[oberliner]

49. Guardian dumps Joshua Treviño

Citing his failure to disclose a major conflict of interest, The Guardian has dumped Joshua Treviño, nine days after it announced it had hired him as a columnist.

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/guardian-dumps-joshua-trevino

[shira]

50. Beware the power & influence of the anti-Israel Lobby.