politics. (sorry.)

i'm not disagreeing with krugman. he's a smart man, he knows his foreign policy, he knows his history. but ... well, let's back up. according to the globe and mail, mahathir refuses to apologize and insists that the world's reaction to his statements prove his point:

Mr. Mahathir has refused to apologize for his comments, insisting they were misinterpreted and taken out of context. In a newspaper interview published this morning in The Bangkok Post, he said reaction to his comments proves that Jews control the world. "In my speech I condemned all violence, even the suicide bombings," he said. "That was the whole tone of my speech, but they picked up one sentence where I said that the Jews control the world.

"Well, the reaction of the world shows they control the world."

He said his comments were only partly reported by the Western media because "many newspapers are owned by Jews".

this blog entry, from "edstrong: the only radical left," um, scares the shit out of me. it quotes some of the rest of mahathir's speech. this is the context out of which mahathir insists his "offensive" comments -- "the europeans killed 6 million jews out of 12 million, but today jews rule the world by proxy. they get others to fight and die for them" -- were taken:

[The Jews] survived 2000 years of pogroms not by hitting back, but by thinking.
They invented and successfully promoted Socialism, Communism, human rights and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong, so they may enjoy equal rights with others.

With these they have now gained control of the most powerful countries and they, this tiny community, have become a world power.

We cannot fight them through brawn alone. We must use our brains also.

so is this the part that received the standing ovation justifiably? the part that summons to fight "we" and "them," "them" being goddammit a tiny group of people to which i happen to belong? no offense to christians, but why do jews need to take the heat for bush's 99% christian administration and its policies? especially when jews vote, as a bloc, democratic?

back to the initial point: krugman also conflates america with the jews. that's my problem with his article (linked above). krugman sez,

And bear in mind that Mr. Mahathir's remarks were written before the world learned about the views of Lt. Gen. William "My God Is Bigger Than Yours" Boykin. By making it clear that he sees nothing wrong with giving an important post in the war on terror to someone who believes, and says openly, that Allah is a false idol � General Boykin denies that's what he meant, but his denial was implausible even by current standards � Donald Rumsfeld has gone a long way toward confirming the Muslim world's worst fears.

why is THAT confirming their worst fears? boykin = goykin. rumsfeld's goykin too. neither of them has anything to do w/ the rothschilds.

if mahathir is urging the muslim world to fight the west, even just by thinking, i'm part of the west & that would affect me. but if he is urging the muslim world to fight the jews, EVEN JUST BY THINKING, even just as a political tactic, as krugman suggests, that affects me more. krugman doesn't suggest a solution except, implicitly, that since jews are taking the heat for the evil of this administration, it will help to get a new one. if that's what it takes, i don't care who it is -- dean, clark, gep -- but for god's sake, go get 'em.