![]() ![]() On the 9/11 attacks, he has also argued that “there have been questions raised here and there and allegations of official complicity made almost from the day of the attacks,” and that there are “well-evidenced doubts about the official version of the events: an al Qaeda operation with no foreknowledge by government officials.”Īnd now, courtesy of Annie Robbins of Mondoweiss, we see Falk speaking last week about the “realities of the Israel Palestine conflict and how it has distorted the American reality,” before the St. More recently, Falk has become something of a champion in the fever swamps of the left, tagging Israel as an apartheid state, accusing her of genocide, and comparing her to the Nazis. ![]() Then, evincing that matchless precsience for which he has come to be known, he predicted that “having created a new model of popular revolution based, for the most part, on nonviolent tactics, Iran may yet provide us with a desperately-needed model of humane governance for a third-world country,” and, excoriating the naysayers, asserted that, “To suppose that Ayatollah Khomeini is dissembling, seems almost beyond belief.” Israelis may think that Richard Falk is no friend of theirs, but, in a way, they are wrong the redoubtable professor emetrius of international law at Princeton is arguably one of the better advertisements of the mendacity and unhinged lunacy that pervades the anti-Israel, pro-terror left.įalk, in 1979, authored one of the true classics of Western useful idiocy, “Trusting Khomeini,” where he decried the depiction of the Ayatollah Khomeini by certain American leaders as “fanatical, reactionary, and the bearer of crude prejudices” as wrong, and added that this was done “in a manner calculated to frighten.”
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |