In an article written for FrontPageMagazine.com on October 19, 2007, Alan Dershowitz delivers a diatribe against the Oxford Union and a number of individuals because they decided to debate the situation in Palestine. Dershowitz himself was invited to participate in the discussion but he declined as he says: I turned down [the] invitation because of the "when did you stop beating your wife" terms of the debate and my proposed teammates.
The Oxford Union and the people that Dershowitz attacks are quite capable of defending themselves although I doubt they will bother to do that, and I shall not take up their causes myself. I shall not weigh in on the merits of the resolution to be debated either: (This house believes that One State is the Only Solution to the Israel-Palestine Conflict) because the debaters are eminently more qualified than me to do that. What I shall discuss are the image and the true essence of Alan Dershowitz as they emerge from his article, and the consequences thereof.
The man says he did not go to the debate because he does not like the terms of the debate or his proposed teammates. Let me begin with the teammate issue. Dershowitz says: "The resolution is simply another way of presenting an anti-Israel side (the one-state solution) and a pro-Israel side (the two-state solution)." He, Dershowitz, was invited to be on the team advocating the two-state solution but the organizers tagged him with teammates he does not like so he said no thank you.
In fact, the Oxford Union never meant to present the debate as pro Israel or anti Israel. It is just that Dershowitz sees the whole world in terms of pro Israel or anti Israel. His brain is so wired that you are either with Israel or you are against Israel. And this condition debilitates him so badly that he is incapable of looking at any issue without seeing it through that narrow prism.
Thus, when he looked at his proposed team through the prism, he was horrified to see who was on it. Things got worse when Norman Finkelstein was picked in his stead after he turned down the invitation. This is how Dershowitz puts it: Yet by the standards of the Oxford Union, Norman Finkelstein is regarded as a pro Israel "scholar" – at least in this debate. Just last May, the same Finkelstein was selected to debate the anti-Israel side of the proposition: "This House believes the pro-Israeli lobby has successfully stifled Western debate about Israel’s action."
Here again, the proposition to discuss whether or not the activities of the Israeli lobby stifled Western debate is seen by Dershowitz through the narrow prism of his mentality and he settles on an angle through which he seeks to determine whether the proposition is pro Israel or anti Israel.
It is worth recalling at this point that when Alan Dershowitz began to show signs of strangeness a while ago and was regarded as becoming too self contradictory to be taken seriously, his friends rushed to his defense to say that to hold two contradictory ideas at the same time was a mark of supreme intelligence, not strangeness.
Well, here apparently, is a supremely intelligent man who can hold two contradictory ideas at the same time but cannot reconcile two simple notions, one being that a two state solution for Israel may have merit and the other being that the pro-Israeli lobby may have stifled Western debate. Norman Finklestein entertained these two positions and Dershowitz cries foul.
It is amazing, therefore, to witness how supreme intelligence works with some people but then, who are we not to be amazed. So let me say on behalf of all how grateful we are that we now have a clear demonstration as to why the rest of us can never be as intelligent as Alan Dershowitz, and we accept our humble lot without envy.
Let us now cut this crap and get real. Alan Dershowitz has another problem which is contributing to his debilitation. To him, that which he regards as pro Israel represents the truth, and that which he regards as anti Israel represents the lie. And because everything is either pro Israel or anti Israel, it follows that everything is either true or false.
Even when a question is far from being a true or false proposition, Dershowitz will see it only in those terms. For example, to hold a debate is just that, hold a debate. The purpose of the debate may be one thing or another but it cannot be the debate itself nor can it be any of the possible outcomes of the debate. Not so with Dershowitz who will ask: in holding the debate, are they pro Israel or anti Israel?
And here is the evidence for this, the fact that the Oxford Union held the May debate leads Alan Dershowitz to conclude the following: "Considering the locus of the debate – and its sponsor (the Arab nation of Qatar) – it is not surprising that the proposition won overwhelmingly despite its demonstrable falsehood. Truth plays little role in Oxford Union debates." And then, to enforce the point still further, Dershowitz goes on to say: The Oxford Union: may it rest in peace, along side Pravda and other departed purveyors of "truths," Stalin-style.
Well, let us now take a deep breath and then ask: could this supremely intelligent man not have taken the challenge, gone to the debate to which he was invited and taken the truth to the lesser mortals who may well have appreciated his company? He is by all accounts capable of spreading truth and enlightenment with the sort of magic that leaves everyone breathless. Look, for example, how he persuaded people of his sincerity when he went around saying he was a friend of the Palestinians. Was there anyone in the world who doubted him? Of course not. Next time they elect a Palestinian Pope you know which Jew will be made saint.
Jokes aside, this forces us to conclude that no, it could not be that Alan Dershowitz declined the invitation because of his teammates. He is so high above everyone that to be teamed with this mate or that mate would have made no difference. But if not the teammates, then why did he not go to the debate? Well, we must admit we are at wit’s end and have no choice but to look at the other reason Dershowitz gave for not going to the debate: I turned down [the] invitation because of the "when did you stop beating your wife" terms of the debate.
Eureka! This must be it. Alan Dershowitz did not go to the debate because he would not bother with something so mundane as to set the record straight. That supremely intelligent man they call Dershowitz did not go to the debate because he was too busy doing something much more important than debate anti Israel resolutions, he was beating his wife.
So now we know why America is on top of the World, Harvard is on top of America and Dershowitz is on top of Harvard. Is this for real or what!
Is this what you have been reduced to, America? Is it possible that Alan Dershowitz has come to represent your crème de la crème? Is he the face of America that Europe and the rest of the World must see when they inquire as to the state of your legal system, the caliber of your culture and the force of your intellectual life? Is this what you have become?
You won the first World War, America, to save Europe from itself; you won the second World War to save the Planet from itself but now you are losing your self-respect as you allow everything to be reduced to the one trivial notion: either you are for Israel or you are against America.
Read the Dershowitz article, America, and you will realize what a low caliber document this is, and what a low caliber intellect has authored it. Yet when you look at it, you will be looking at yourself as if looking in the mirror. And when you see how ugly you have become, weep America. Weep at yourself and promise to get back to where you were because people of goodwill want to look at you again and feel cheerful not get sick to the stomach or feel sorry for you.