I've always found Dershowitz to be one of those rare polarizing figures in American politics in that while his politics are mostly liberal, even the most staunch conservative may find themselves agreeing with him on certain matters of constitutional law. The civil libertarian in me can't help but find myself agreeing with Dershowitz almost as often as I disagree, but either way, I always have found his writing skills to be exceptional. With that being said, at times Dershowitz can be quite shrill in his attempts to shout down the opposing point of view, especially in television formats like Crossfire. He's as guilty of using vitriolic speech as any of the talking heads that travel the news-talk show circuits. So it's a bit of irony to see Dershowitz notably shaken by his experience outside of Faneuil Hall.

From the article:
I do not believe that criticism of Israel, or even of Zionism, is tantamount to anti-Semitism and I have so written over the years. But what happened in front of Faneuil Hall went beyond criticism. To be sure, it was constitutionally protected speech, just as the Nazi march through Skokie was constitutionally protected speech. But the shouting was plainly calculated to intimidate. An aura of violence was in the air, and had the police not been there, I would not have been able to express any views counter to theirs.

I've thought on more than one occassion that were it not for the intervention of the host of the debate, Dershowitz would never allow his opponent a word of rebuttal. It seems Mr. Dershowitz is quite the bully as long as the format is to his liking.

Regarding the point of the article, I certainly don't begrudge him for writing about his experience. The comparisons to Hitler and Goebbels are sick, ill-informed, and very telling about the moral and ethical character of those that were shouting the epithets. These fuckwits are of the same ilk as the type of human flotsam and jetsam that show up everytime the World Bank, the WTO, or whatever organization they happen to disagree with is in town trying to conduct meetings. This country has a definable sub-culture of social rejects that are paid to protest. Professional rabble-rousers, political mercenaries that travel the country, and in some cases the world, fueled by ignorance, hatred, marijauna and an ill-conceived belief that patchouli negates the need to bathe properly. :rolleyes:


From the article:
I will not be silenced nor intimidated. The shouters know that. Their goal is to silence and intimidate others, who do not get police protection and do not have access to the media. Let the debate about Israel and the Palestinians continue unabated. Let all views be heard. The shouters in front of Faneuil Hall wanted no views but their own to be seen and heard. They succeeded that day in front of Faneuil Hall, as they have on some university campuses, but the marketplace of ideas is far too vibrant to be shut down by a bunch of self-righteous thugs shouting ugly and bigoted epithets.

This paragraph just undergirds my opinion that Dershowitz is one of those exceptional minds that understands the true spirit of the First Amendment. Both sides of the aisle would be wise to remember these words the next time they fall back to the base instincts in the pursuit of furthering a political, moral, religious or personal agenda. If your argument has merit and substance, you don't have to yell. ;)

Do the link:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=12511

What a poor response by Dershowitz. Nothing but egotism.

Oh, poor guy. He has to face some protesters when he receives a religiously-derived award. Maybe Dershowitz doesn't remember the America of twenty and thirty years ago, but I'm quite sure he's defended black people before.

People are people, but Dershowitz is being a whining little baby this time out:Although the signs they were carrying were not anti-Semitic, the sign carriers were shouting epithets at me that crossed the line from civility to bigotry. "Dershowitz and Hitler, just the same, the only difference is the name." The sin that, in the opinion of the screamers, warranted this comparison between me and the man who murdered dozens of my family members was my support for Israel. It was irrelevant to these chanters that I also support a Palestinian state, the end of the Israeli occupation and the dismantling of most of the settlements. They also shouted "Dershowitz and Gibbels [sic], just the same, the only difference is the name" - not even knowing how to pronounce the name of the anti-Semitic Nazi propagandist.Yeah ... they're annoying, off-base, and even out of line. But that they can't spell "Goebbels" doesn't change the fact that Dershowitz's comment is a mean-spirited fallacy.

Look--accept an award for anything from Zionists, and you're going to get heckled. This is an operating reality. And Dershowitz shouldn't be upset about being compared to Hitler. The last couple of years have rendered such comparisons ineffective.

Dershowitz is just pissed because someone rained on his parade.

Regarding the point of the article, I certainly don't begrudge him for writing about his experience. The comparisons to Hitler and Goebbels are sick, ill-informed, and very telling about the moral and ethical character of those that were shouting the epithets. These fuckwits are of the same ilk as the type of human flotsam and jetsam that show up everytime the World Bank, the WTO, or whatever organization they happen to disagree with is in town trying to conduct meetings. This country has a definable sub-culture of social rejects that are paid to protest. Professional rabble-rousers, political mercenaries that travel the country, and in some cases the world, fueled by ignorance, hatred, marijauna and an ill-conceived belief that patchouli negates the need to bathe properly. :rolleyes:

The actions of these protestors have little in common with the anti-globalization, and anti-war movements at large. You have some serious misconception about protestors.
1. Protestors PAY to protest, they are not paid to do it. Given your descripton of yourself as a civil libertarian, you'll be shocked to know that the freedom of the people to peacably assemble has in fact been abridged somewhat these days(especially for those who's views are outside the mainstream) Permits are required for the assembly itself, and for any sound amplification equipment, and these permits cost money, and are not always easy to secure.
In addition to this is the time involved and the cost of transportation to a protest. Your description of them as mercenarys is ridiculous, as rather than working for the highest bidder, much of time they put their own hard earned money into a cause because of the strength of their convictions
2. Protests are among the most friendly and safe atmospheres i've ever been in(barring attacks by the police). It is an atmosphere where people ask complete strangers to carry their things for them if they are tired without fear that they will run off with them. Protests are not fueled by hate, they are fueled by people's intense devotion to helping others.
3. Protestors themselves are among the most knowledgable and well-educated crowds you could find. The fact of the matter is, the views that protetsors espouse are not availbable to those who do not actively seek out information on the issues involved. No one goes to a protest because they saw something on tv about it.
4. Believe it or not, not all that many protestors wear patchouli and don't bathe. In addition, almost no one smokes pot at protests, as the police are always eager for any reason to make an arrest.



If your argument has merit and substance, you don't have to yell. ;)


secceding from Britain, ending slavery, and granting civil rights to minorities were not issues that had merit?