In his latest post, Alan Dershowitz claims that he wants to elevate the dialogue and create a more "productive discourse." Then he calls me a liar. What a shame that he feels the need to keep using that kind of rhetoric when such critical issues are at stake.
When it comes to the Middle East, justice for everyone in the region - and the very survival of Israel - hang in the balance. And where the issues of torture, pre-emption, and extrajudicial (that is to say, illegal) government
actions are concerned, we're dealing with our national future - militarily, diplomatically, and even spiritually.
Dershowitz's post, during this time of worldwide crisis, is essentially about himself. Specifically, it addresses six "lies" he feels are being told about him when he writes about Israel or torture. The first alleged "lie" is that he advocates the use of torture.
I believe that Alan Dershowitz does advocate for torture, albeit under controlled conditions. (He recommends legal mechanisms to add what he calls "visibility and accountability" to the process of judicially authorizing torture.) I'm adamant in my belief that its use by American forces should be unconditionally banned - not authorized under certain circumstances. I believe that's the only correct position, both strategically and morally.
The second "lie" he cites is this: " Dershowitz believes that all criticism of Israel or Israeli policies is anti-Semitic or motivated by a hatred of Jews." And who does he cite? Yours truly.
He writes:
"There is even a poster on this site named RJ Eskow who apparently feels the need to accuse me of accusing everyone else of anti-Semitism in nearly every one of his own posts. See here, for example."
What you're reading is not the piece I wrote when I first read this paragraph. What I initially put on paper documented what I consider Dershowitz's deceptive statements in exhausting detail, including a list of five or six misstatements ... about me.
In other words, I did exactly what he's doing. But then I took a deep breath and tore it up. (Figuratively, of couse, since it's in a computer.) After all, if I think it's self-centered for Dershowitz to go on and on about himself during this time of crisis, then why would I do the same? I'm no public figure. Who cares what somebody says about me?
Here's what matters: There is a group of influential Americans (including Dershowitz, Tony Blakeley, and most of the Republican Party) who advocate the use of torture under certain conditions. I believe they are gravely wrong - ethically and tactically.
There are also a number of influential Americans who strongly support the militaristic policies of the Likud and ex-Likud faction in Israeli politics (which does not equate to "support for Israel," no matter what anyone says.)
I believe that Dershowitz is one of our leading practitioners of the use of intimidation to silence debate on these important topics, by using accusations of bigotry to end the discourse. He's by no means the only one, but he's one of the best known. If I challenge him it's only in order to shine a light on this tactic, and on the ways it's used to hide what I consider to be essential flaws in the arguments used by him and others of like mind.
His latest post, and my small mention in it, is only worth discussing in that context.
It's true I wrote that Dershowitz "hands out accusations of bigotry like a clown hands out balloons at a birthday party." Why? For one thing, because he's accused so many of his fellow Harvard profs of anti-Semitism (76 so far, according to one estimate.) For another, because he writes sentences like "it will provoke ... bigots to accuse me of supporting torture."
But enough about people and personalities. There are important matters before us.
Prof. Dershowitz, I applaud the notion of elevating the discourse. In that spirit, I suggest you and your allies cut back on the false accusations and the theatrics, so that we Americans can have a real dialogue - about the morality (or the immorality) of torture, and about the right way to secure peace for Israel and its neighbors.
The country needs a serious discussion about these issues, conducted by sober and rational people who are unencumbered by either name-calling or defensiveness. If we want to be a better people, we need to rise above all that.
I intend to try, and you're more than welcome to join me.