skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Labels:
Oliver Stone
Alana Goodman, who brought the Oliver Stone story across the Atlantic from the Sunday Times of London to Newsbusters, asks why the reaction has been muted compared with the reaction to Mel Gibson's drunken anti-Semitic rant four years ago.
Read the whole thing. Could it be that Oliver Stone is being treated like an etrog by his friends in the Leftist mainstream media? Jennifer Rubin seems to think so:
Maybe it’s Stone’s long leftist track record — who can forget his glowing biopic of Fidel Castro? — that has earned him a pass from the liberal U.S. media.
But maybe there is something else at work. Stone’s venomous rant against “Jewish domination of the media” and his assertion about the “Israel lobby” (”They stay on top of every comment, the most powerful lobby in Washington. Israel has f***** up United States foreign policy for years”) are not so different from what comes from the lips of Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, the writings of the Israel-hating left, and the bile-drenched blogs of those who, for example, claimed John McCain was surrounded by Jewish neocon advisers.
It’s reasonable to conclude that Oliver Stone hasn’t been called out by the liberals — those who advertise themselves as experts on diversity and bigotry — because a great deal of what he said doesn’t sound all that objectionable to far too many of them. And of course, it’s rather embarrassing for those seeking respectability (the “tough love for Israel” gang) to illuminate that anti-Israel venom is, when you scratch the surface, nothing more than old-fashioned Jew-hating.
