Charlie Rose

tartufe  07/21/2009 01:42 PM Report

Shalom, you're indomitable as you are obtuse. Despite quotes from Israeli sources (el Ha'retz) you continue with denials to wit: "He quotes figures out of context, knows nothing really about the Middle East." Well thanks for the opportunity to demonstrate (YET AGAIN) the admitted STATE-TERRORISM ISRAEL PERPETUTATES.

"Israeli Soldiers Testify to War Crimes

The PulsePosted March 19, 2009 - 10:01am "During Operation Cast Lead, Israeli forces killed Palestinian civilians under permissive rules of engagement and intentionally destroyed their property, say soldiers who fought in the offensive," Ha'aretz reported today.

At a lecture at a pre-military academy Israeli soldiers and officers gave personal accounts of murder and brutality.

Ofer Shelah in Ma'ariv:

For the first time since the end of Operation Cast Lead, testimonies have come to the fore of soldiers and officers from different units that took part in the operation. The testimonies . . . paint a harsh picture, very different from the IDF reports: Killing people who were clearly identified as innocent, driving families out of their homes to the open area where a policy was in force according to which whoever remained in the area was not an innocent person and could be shot, acts of vandalism and destroying property and humanitarian supplies, and an atmosphere in which the combatants understood that all this was permitted, and would not be investigated."

I'll admit to knowing nothing of the Middle East, but since the information will curdle your milk, I've been to the Wailing Wall.

ShalomFreedman  07/21/2009 01:58 AM Report

This set of comments was supposed to be devoted to the interview with Bob Woodward. That was a wide- ranging interview in which Woodward spoke about his relation to the Bush Administration, and future work he is doing in regard to the Obama Administration.

Instead the discussion has focused on the charges made against Israel by a heroic poster who hides behind the sobriquet 'Tartuffe. He is in his opinions a very anti- American and above all anti- Israeli person. He quotes figures out of context, knows nothing really about the Middle East.

He happily embraces as his ally someone who at least tells us who he is, Mr. Anton Grambihler. He is more incapable of basic English than Tartuffe, and his hatred of Jews and Israel probably has different roots than does Tartuffe's.

Together they make a fine pair and are incapable of any kind of discussion which shows real respect or consideration of others.

They operate in total opposition to the spirit of the' Charlie Rose ' show.

ion  07/20/2009 10:05 PM Report

I think some of the comments seem emotional - no one is swayed my emotional arguments. In such a forum one should just stick to facts and keep ranting to a minimum.

just a village idiot at a village inn by the sea

tartufe  07/20/2009 04:01 PM Report

TO CR MONITORS: You have seen fit to delete two comments by doodahdaze. That has the potential of you being as dangerous as ShalomFreedman. Shalom's chauvinistic zealotry was actually more anti-Israel, than pro. Doodadaze's admonition to 'shut up, shut up, shut up,' could be taken as a helpful suggestion (that Shalom so far has taken to heart). Inflammatory words are instructive and communicate succinctly and emphatically. Emotions, feelings and meaning simultaneously imparted. If they're out there they need to be heard in all their vitriol and rage. People are dying, being murdered. Does a word or two outweigh those acts that they rail against? If doodahdaze was out of bounds, so too were you. (Lastly his sense of humor and word-play were more in gear as much as intent anyway. He's a bit weird but not as bad as your deletion distorts, magnifies.)

tartufe  07/19/2009 04:39 PM Report

Ahhh, but there my chauvinistic friend lies the rub, by whose standards do we use to select the arbiter of a "fairly refereed" comment??? By your standards of denying even Israeli documented sources citing Israeli soldiers testifying to war crimes and thus proving Israel state terrorism, ipso facto disqualifies you or anyone you would approve of as being the arbiter of a fairly refereed comment.

Your resorting to crying 'foul' after Mr. AntonGrambihler 07/18/2009 02:15 PM comment suggests he hit a nerve. If indeed it's merely "stupidity and malevolence," such straw men, paper tigers etc should be easily refuted rather than whimpering for Charlie to close down the forum altogether. (Do you ever embarrass yourself?) Think of the ramifications: CHARLIE ROSE CLOSES COMMENTS FORUM ON CHARGES (SOME) POSTERS ARE ANTI-SEMETIC!

Really? Is that what you want? Would you then proceed (Gestapo-style) to the WSJ, NYT, Huffington Post, Twitter, et al? Where do you anointed deciders of right and wrong stop? And finally, your emotion-charged word of "anti-semitic" may be a secret-weapon for you, but is a hollow thump compared to anti-killing (by US, by Israel, by Arabs, by zealots of all stripes). So you may say the "S" word (or the "N" one if it satisfies somehow), and feel smugly victorious. It's as vacuous as your denials of Israel State terrorism. So go for it.

charlizecourriers  07/19/2009 04:08 PM Report

It's great to hear Bob tell us what needs to be inscribed on his tombstone. "I suspect, but sure could be dead wrong."If, as I think, history will confirm that Bush was feeling the correct intuition in his gut and that the war in Iraq was just what was needed and that he actually won it, then Woodward will be seen as dead wrong on yet another of his suspicions. This show is a stunning admission of not only how little Woodward knows, but how oblivious he is to all the drivel he has written which was wrong. Bob never said one key thing about himself, something the boy from Henderson,N.C. never says. "I don't know." Their real fear is that Obama will be tested soon and fail, i.e., turn out to be dead wrong. We'll see! P.S. Shalom needs to book a one way ticket to the land of Zion-where the truth is edited and if necessary, eliminated, daily.

ShalomFreedman  07/19/2009 05:18 AM Report

It is not Fascism to demand that a discussion be conducted by competent , fair, and rational people who address others with respect. The problem with the posters whose violent anti- Israeli and I may say anti- Semitic remarks appear repeatedly on this Charlie Rose site is that they are not fair, not rational, and not even literate. They are the Internet at its worst, opinionizing out of ignorance, and abusing out of hate.

I am sorry that this is the situation, but I truly think the kind of hate- filled abusive language which a few of the those who post on this site display , means that there can be no real discussion with them. The best would be for the site to be fairly refereed by those who simply do not allow the worst of the worst to beat others over the head with their own stupidity and malevolence.

tartufe  07/18/2009 07:53 PM Report

Shalom(inapigsass) - your true fascism is being exposed. Didn't Nazism start with CONTROLLING the press, freedom of expression? Does the TRUTH hurt that much. Would you like to redo all the Amendments while you're at it? Or perhaps the whole constitution? Gestapo style?

Your own Israeli news source I've cited - and will again - for you to exhibit your pathological Israeli chauvinism denial. To wit:

"Israeli Soldiers Testify to War Crimes

The PulsePosted March 19, 2009 - 10:01am "During Operation Cast Lead, Israeli forces killed Palestinian civilians under permissive rules of engagement and intentionally destroyed their property, say soldiers who fought in the offensive," Ha'aretz reported today.

At a lecture at a pre-military academy Israeli soldiers and officers gave personal accounts of murder and brutality.

Ofer Shelah in Ma'ariv:

For the first time since the end of Operation Cast Lead, testimonies have come to the fore of soldiers and officers from different units that took part in the operation. The testimonies . . . paint a harsh picture, very different from the IDF reports: Killing people who were clearly identified as innocent, driving families out of their homes to the open area where a policy was in force according to which whoever remained in the area was not an innocent person and could be shot, acts of vandalism and destroying property and humanitarian supplies, and an atmosphere in which the combatants understood that all this was permitted, and would not be investigated."

ADMITTED STATE TERRORISM!!! (Made to order for you to deny - again and again and again. At least I'm willing to admit my country's faults - elstwise they will never be corrected. Imo you too could do more for Israel with a more realistic view, rather than school-boy type denial.)

NOW you're crying to Charlie monitors(?) to ELIMINATE THIS COMMENTS SECTION COMPLETELY. You'll go far in that Israeli Terrorist State with those Gestapo tactics.

Seik Heil, Shalom(iapa), Seik Heil!

ShalomFreedman  07/18/2009 05:00 PM Report

I strongly recommend that the 'Charlie Rose' show edit this comments section, or eliminate it completely. In fact considering the number of viewers the show has the number of comments are quite small. And there are a few people, including myself who post frequently and make up a good share of the comments.

The reason I suggest this kind of editorial supervision is that frequently the posters are not commenting on the show, but rather grinding their own particular axes. They may do this in fairly reasonable ways, but for the most part they do it in deranged and illiterate fashion as in the comment which follows mine on this series of postings.

The Charlie Rose Show is a forum of intelligent discussion in which the host treats each of his guests with consummate respect and consideration.

The kinds of comments which appear on this site are often the very opposite of this.

Something should be done about it.

AntonGrambihler  07/18/2009 02:15 PM Report

Once again you make a mention of Iran as being a problem in the Middle East, but completely ignore Israeli violations of International Law and United Nations resolutions currently and over the last 60 years.

You mentioned Rahm Emanuel, but did not mention that Dual Citizen Emanuel served in the Israeli Army and not the United States Army. Who you think that he is serving as President Obama’s Chief of Staff?

Rahm Emanuel’s Father may have been a part of the terrorist organization that rose up against the Palestine People. This is the real cause of the problems in the Middle East..

Israel was created by a terrorist uprising and has never abided by the United Nations resolution which authorized the taking of land from the Palestine People and giving it to the Terrorists. Israel does not have a signed Constitution. In addition this land called Israel illegally invaded its neighbors and illegally occupies this land and continues to destroy Palestine Homes and builds illegal settlements. Israel treats the Palestine People inhumanely and calls them Terrorists when they try to get their land back from the illegal Israeli Invasion. Why has the United States blocked the investigations of possible massacres of the Palestine People by Israel?

Israel has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT or NNPT). Israel has unregulated Nuclear Weapons. The United States provided Israel with missiles to deliver the Israeli Nuclear Bombs. The United States and Israel threaten Iran with sanctions and possible bombings. I wonder why Iran might want Nuclear Bombs. Why is it wrong for North Korea and Iran to maybe supply weapons to the Palestine Freedom fighters trying to get their land back from the illegal Israeli invasion and occupation, while it is considered OK for the United States a member of the NPT to provide missiles to Israel, a non-member of the NPT, for the delivery of Israeli Nuclear bombs? Where did Israel get its technology, parts, and Nuclear Material for its Nuclear Bombs?

Israel Bombed the United States in 1967 and it was covered up. Israel has killed United States Citizens and not been held accountable. Israel has Kidnapped American Citizens and President Obama has not spoken out about it, but he did speak out about recent internal affairs of Iran.

Why is the United States helping fund the rampant racism which allows the Genocide of the Palestine People and denies their right of return for the creation of a Jewish Homeland? Did the United States learn nothing about what happens when land is taken from one people and given to another? Do they not recall what happened when land was taken from Czechoslovakia and given to the Nazis, and the Genocides committed by the Nazis? How many people must die before this Israeli Genocide is called a Holocaust?

Where is the News Media that is suppose to keep the Citizens informed?

If the 100% citizens were informed, do you think they would have supported taking land from the Palestine People and giving it to Terrorists? Do you think that they support funding the continued Racism and Genocide being committed by these Terrorists?

kiranand  07/17/2009 06:45 PM Report

I have read many of Woodward's books. I still do because he happens to get information that many others would not get purely due to his stature in the journalistic world. However over the years he has lost the sheen he acquired after Watergate and has morphed into some sort of Washington creature who values access over objectivity. This was suspected by his readership and his critics right after "Maestro" his fawning paen to Greenspan and totally confirmed with the early tomes on Bush. In this interview he tries to deflect some of that criticism - kudos to Charlie for bringing it up - this was the part where the issue of "access" whether too much of it was a compromise on the integrity of the reporting process and Woodward's excuses are thin as gruel. From a vestal virgin to a harlot of Washington more or less sums up Bob Woodward.

doodahdaze  07/17/2009 05:03 PM Report

But what does all that have to do with the Kennedys? And Camelot? And the Keynesians? .. And dare I say it?. .. Mother? <smile>

REMant  07/17/2009 02:31 PM Report

I think I have never read one of Woodward's books, tho I've read him in the paper, of course, and seen him a lot on TV. But I think he would make or makes a fine historian. However, as he implied, it is not very often possible to do history as a newspaperman. I was trained as a scientist before I found myself in Vietnam as a correspondent, and the first thing I realized was that I would never be able to discover what was actually going on, or if I did, be allowed to write about it. Since I felt very uncomfortable about drawing unwarranted conclusions just to fill space, I did a lot of either battle reports, or Ernie Pyle-type stuff. Reflecting on that experience later I realized that, like history, journalism was not necessarily to be viewed as the actions of great, or even simple men. For instance, as Minister of Munitions in WWI, Lloyd George reportedly made a deal with the developer of a process for producing acetone needed by Britain in exchange for a promise to support a Jewish state in Palestine, which resulted in the Balfour Declaration when he became prime minister, but this does not explain Zionism, and which is more important, the deal, or the movement? One could treat reporting the same as any scientist would, as a black box inferring mechanics from the inputs and outputs what was going on, and compare it with what is being said. We could dissect personalities and strategems regarding the healthcare debate, or we could just lay out the possibilities and who benefited, thus inferring motives, or merely leave it at the sociological level. I see more of this nowadays than several decades ago, particularly in the blogs springing up dedicated to certain policy issues. It is more evident in historical writing, too, which are looking at larger social and economic issues. In process you are at least generating questions to ask or leads to pursue, and no doubt pressing someone to answer them. Actually, THAT reminds me of Perry Mason.

I will have to get the Bundy book and read it, and I hope Woodward does publish the McNamara interview. I think the Rumsfeld-McNamara comparison interesting as I mentioned the other day. An article taken from Graham's book appeared in the Post Magazine in June. I am not sure that Rumsfeld's idea of simply getting out of Iraq and letting the Iraqis sort it out themselves was such a bad idea. As it was, it seems the apparent policy impasse, as in Vietnam, cost a lot of American, British and Iraqi lives, and I think the outcome would likely have been pretty much the same. It never pays to get in the middle of a civil war, and you are left with only two alternatives for control - force or bribery - neither of which helps ppl develop self-reliance. The question I would ask is whether this was not in fact McNamara's assessment during Vietnam as well. The tragedy of that war is that once in, we could not stay and could not leave, and yet by the time the public forced the issue the war had pretty much been won militarily. Leaving meant it was all for naught, with severe, long-lasting foreign and domestic policy repercussions, as McCain argued with respect to Iraq. I don't think either the JFK or LBJ admins wanted to get involved, but were trapped by the general hysteria about dominoes and guerrilla wars and such, which they, themslves, had helped to generate. I think Rumsfeld no less than Powell must have been aware that winning the battles does not equate to winning the war, as must also have been the press, which you will recall kept asking whether it was Vietnam yet, and asking about exit strategies. Al Qaeda and co knew it too when they said they would actually be sorry to see us go. I do not believe either that Rumsfeld shared Bush's and Rice's apparent, but possibly rationalized, desire to help our little brown friends, to use LBJ's expression.