It took a while for this story to make the rounds. The kerfuffle happened last Wednesday, with the Jewish newspaper The Forward the first to break it last Friday.
General Jim Jones got predictably creamed by Anti-Defamation League’s Abe Foxman and others for telling a “Jewish merchant” joke at a recent Washington Institute for Near East Policy dinner, whose audience was largely Jewish. Foxman, as per his usual politically correct self, used the opportunity to castigate Jones for his “stereotypical” language that he viewed “was about the worst kind of joke the head of the National Security Council could have told.” It’s a joke, so it’s unlikely to be reverent, the judgment being a matter of taste. Never mind the audience laughed.
Robert Satloff, the executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), put it succinctly, saying the whole kerfuffle was a “real tempest in a teapot,” and that there are more important issues concerning the think tank, which should go without saying. However, this stuff is what the Democratic defamation crowd thrives on.
Next comes “borders on anti-Semitic” calls from the right, with Pajamas Media’s Roger Simon going all the way. They would have tarred and feathered Shakespeare. Powerline talks about the “guffaws of the crowd, but the blog cites two unamused comments.” Out of a crowd only “two”?
Can Chuck Schumer be far behind?
Cue the apology, which Jones has now offered, with a point at salient soberness.
“I wish that I had not made this off the cuff joke at the top of my remarks, and I apologize to anyone who was offended by it. It also distracted from the larger message I carried that day: that the United States commitment to Israel’s security is sacrosanct.” – Gen. Jim Jones
I heard Jones at the J-Street dinner. He’s a very low key speaker, so telling a joke in the first place puts him on shifting turf.
Via Josh Rogin, the joke text is below:
In order to set the stage for my remarks I’d just like to tell you a story that I think is true. It happened recently in southern Afghanistan. A member of the Taliban was separated from his fighting party and wandered around for a few days in the desert, lost, out of food, no water. And he looked on the horizon and he saw what looked like a little shack and he walked towards that shack. And as he got to it, it turned out it was a little store own by a Jewish merchant. And the Taliban warrior went up to him and said, “I need water, give me some water.” And the merchant said, “I’m sorry, I don’t have any water but would you like a tie. We have a nice sale of ties today.”
Whereupon the Taliban erupted into a stream of language that I can’t repeat, about Israel, about Jewish people, about the man himself, about his family, and just said, “I need water, you try to sell me ties, you people don’t get it.” The merchant stood there until the Taliban was through with his diatribe and said, “Well I’m sorry I don’t have water for you and I forgive you for all of the insults you’ve levied against me, my family, my country. But I will help you out. If you go over that hill and walk about two miles there is a restaurant there and they will have all the water you need.” And the Taliban, instead of saying thanks, still muttering under his breath, disappears over the hill, only to come back an hour later, and walking up to the merchant says, “You’re brother tells me a I need a tie to get into the restaurant.”
Political correctness to the right, shadow boxing to the left.
Apologize once and you’ll be forever apologizing. And so it goes. . .
Obama’s enemies, which include people who don’t like Jones going back years, also get to trot out the “anti-Semetic” smear, which is preposterous.
Agreed. The joke was not really funny, but is being used by the Right for political purposes.
“the United States commitment to Israel’s security is sacrosanct.” What an interesting word “sacrosanct,–blindly accepted, holy, divine, unquestioned.” Is the security of any other country on earth sacrosanct to the United States, outside of our own? England? Saudi Arabia? Any other country? Why do we feel obliged to claim publicly that the security of Israel is sacroscant? There must be some deeply rooted psychological issues at play here on the part of the Israelis. That or the United States ‘is’ Israel and Israel ‘is’ the United States. Much of the world believes the latter. Perhaps for good reason? Peace
I’m not in your camp when it comes to Israel, Imhotep, as you know, as I believe you’re not in any way objective, to put it mildly.
But you’ve got something on this one. Sacrosanct seemed like a very telling choice to use here.
I’d be very interested in knowing why you believe that I’m not objective on this issue? Seriously. Peace
Imhotep says:
27 April 2010 at 9:56 am
I’d be very interested in knowing why you believe that I’m not objective on this issue? Seriously. Peace
————————————————–
Bwahahahahahah, you can’t be serious, Imhotep. Objective!?!? You are a raging anti-Jewish bigot, as proven by your hurtful statements that you post every few days criticizing not only Israel, but also Jewish people in general.
And you are a pathological liar and pretender. You know nothing of Jewish history, modern or ancient. If you did you could explain to us the Kabalistic concept of the “split-self” and the symbolism attached to the “mana” of Moses. Care to give it a try?
Does anyone have a clue about what Imhotep is talking about?
As I said you’re a know-nothing pretender and a pathological liar.
Haha, I’m a “pathological liar” because I’m not going to answer this *weird* question? Seriously, Imhotep…
Imhotep says:
27 April 2010 at 10:33 am
And you are a pathological liar and pretender. You know nothing of Jewish history, modern or ancient. If you did you could explain to us the Kabalistic concept of the “split-self” and the symbolism attached to the “mana” of Moses. Care to give it a try?
No, you’re a know-nothing pretender because you don’t know the answer to this”*weird*” question. You’re a pathological liar because you have an untreated psychological disease.
very mature.
Taylor, Obama has been using the word “sacrosanct” with regard to Israel’s security ever since he became a U.S. Senator and all throughout the campaign and into his presidency. What is your problem with this word? The U.S-Israel relationship is a special relationship and President Obama, who is a staunch supporter of this relationship, understands that Israel’s security–on an existential level–is a vital moral and security interest of the U.S. and has been under all presidents, Democratic or Republican. If Israel is to make any concessions toward peace–all involving risk–to a neighbor that is not quite ready to accept Israel’s existence, it must feel that at least one nation in the world, in this case, the US, is looking out for it. Already, you see Netanyahu freezing E. Jerusalem settlements (check out the Israeli papers–and consider a posting on this as well).
You often claim that if Israel were attacked by Iran, the rest of the world would come to Israel’s aid. This is the meaning of “sacroscant.” Thank goodness that President Obama is in power and is so supportive of Israel and peace in the region.
“you see Netanyahu freezing E. Jerusalem settlements” and yet yesterday the Mayor of Jewish West Jerusalem denied this claim of yours saying the Netanyahu told him that it “was business as usual” in Jerusalem. As usual the Israelis present two faces to the world. One fake and one real.