> almost blindly supports Israel's increasingly unjustifiable occupation
Stopped reading since there, since it sounds like a usual blind rant and not anything to do with reality or reason. The moment conflict in Israel kicks in, many otherwise reasonable people lose common sense (it can go in either direction about the sides of the conflict IMHO). Not sure why it's so really.
Otherwise valid criticism is discredited by such cliche phrases which don't suit someone like Knuth.
FWIW I think it's because the debate over the occupation of Palestine usually devolves into name-calling and accusations of anti-semitism etc within the space of.. well minutes at best, usually. Many people flip their "froth at the mouth" bit pretty quickly under those circumstances, be they reasonable people or not.. and so we see little reasoned debate on the subject.
It's not a lie. I stopped reading from there, since it discredited his criticism for me, by showing that he uses stereotypical cliches, rather than something substantial. In general I agree that Condoleezza Rice has a lot to be criticized for, but throwing in cliche phrases doesn't help his cause.
Stopped reading since there, since it sounds like a usual blind rant and not anything to do with reality or reason. The moment conflict in Israel kicks in, many otherwise reasonable people lose common sense (it can go in either direction about the sides of the conflict IMHO). Not sure why it's so really.
Otherwise valid criticism is discredited by such cliche phrases which don't suit someone like Knuth.