Charles C. Johnson (no, not that that CJ) has a post at Big Government, In Praise of Alan Dershowitz. It’s worth the read, but hardly does justice to someone who for generations has fought for civil rights and the survival of western democracy even when it meant bucking the liberal establishment. Dershowitz’s website details his many accomplishments.
Most recently, Dershowitz earned the scorn of the left for his defense of Sarah Palin’s use of the term “blood libel.”
I first met Dershowitz when I was in law school. I didn’t have him for a professor, but he was the advisor to the Harvard Jewish Law Students Association, in which I was active. At the time, the fight on campus was the attempt by supporters of the PLO and “indigenous people’s” movements (including students Glenn Morris, who later worked closely with Ward Churchill, and George Bisharat, now an anti-Israel law professor) to delegitimize Israel.
My how times have not changed. We still are fighting that fight. And Dershowitz is at the forefront of fighting the academic establishment which has turned on Israel, and people like Richard Goldstone who seek to deny Israel the right of self defense by holding Israel to standards no one reasonably could meet in the face of Hamas and other Islamists.
Dershowitz’s report, The Case Against The Goldstone Report, is a primer on how the international human rights movement is used to support the worst abusers of human rights against a pro-western democracy.
You don’t have to agree with Dershowitz on every or even most domestic issues to realize that he is a liberal lion among progressive hyenas.
——————————————–
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Once again, conservatives think that human rights advocacy is only legitimate if it involves ignoring crimes committed by countries you happen to like. Moral relativism at its finest. If the US, Israel or any similar country does it it's okay. If anyone else does it it's a crime against humanity and proof that we must bomb and invade them.
Andrew takes the Jeremiah Wright view of America and Israel. He finds them both guilty of "crimes" against human rights before any evidence is collected, cited, or offered. This is because Andrew, as a progressive, believes that capitalism itself is a crime, indeed the greatest crime against humanity and befitting therefore of the death penalty. He appoints himself therefore, as judge, jury, and executioner of the Court of Oyer and Terminer: case heard and sentence carried out without opportunity to see the evidence against them. In short, capitalists have no right to demand the presentation of evidence against them simply because progressives deem their activities inherently criminal.
http://indexterity.blogspot.com/2011/01/camelboys-injuns-and-unfunny-phonies.html
crap, it would not take my http://www.O.pen ID
Darrel the no proof no profile prof proffers: "capitalism itself is a crime, indeed the greatest crime against humanity and befitting therefore of the death penalty."
your 'befitting is equivalent to ploughing up and under, no doubt good for crapitalljizm
where's the voluntarizing and careful examination in that huh?
you are doing exactly what i claim (at cited url) the american spectator is doing. Trying to foist one's own crimes upon an intended victim and scapegoat.
who said anything about penalty, let alone death?
for your information setting criminals up to do the right thing by not besetting them with raw sewage without the wherewithall to defend themselves and paying them for good compost is punishment enough and will make everybody involved happy, not dead.
i'd be honoured to aim a few turds at Dershovitchsj by the way.