Comments on: Wall Street Journal Misquotes Bernard Lewis on the Crusades

By: Duke

Duke — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 14:51:06 +0000

Claudia, I know you write for the Journal EDITORIAL pages and I have no quarrel with them. However, as a financial guy with deep involvement in markets, I have to tell you that the Journal “News” pages have been questionable sources at best for a long time. They are never to be relied on for accuracy of the truth. Those pages, like the rest of the MSM, are staffed by agenda driven journalism majors who are more interested in “changing the system” than in accurate reporting. I liken the Journal to the movie industry rags, Variety and Hollywood Reporter, that “report” whatever it is that they decide is news and it’s up to the reader to fathom what it is that is really going on. I only use IBD for actual investment info as well as the naked reporting on Bloomberg. Does anyone take CNBC’s chattering laughing girls seriously? MSM journalism is lousy all over.

By: David Nicholas

David Nicholas — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 06:20:57 +0000

This is one of those things that can cause all sorts of controversy, and it’s frankly unfair to Bernard Lewis. Lewis is a wonderful scholar of the Middle East who’s been accused of being both pro- and anti-Muslim, while in actuality being pretty objective. I would suggest that the WSJ issue an immediate retraction, and apologize too. I would imagine the retraction will (has already) come, but I don’t expect much of an apology.

By: PointOfLaw Forum

PointOfLaw Forum — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 19:18:57 +0000

OT: Bernard Lewis at the AEI Dinner

Jacob Weisberg makes much of a single sentence in Bernard Lewis’s one-hour-plus address at the AEI Annual Dinner, which I attended last week. In a lengthy disquisition of the history of Islam’s relationship with the Western world, Lewis spent a…

By: Jed West

Jed West — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 08:49:01 +0000

It is mistake to fall all over ourselves castigating the WSJ for giving the impression that Lewis found some positive in the Crusades. In spite of the atrocities, the Crusades were in sum a very positive event for Western Civilization in that they did have the effect of impeding the Jihad which cutting a bloody swath across the known world at the time. This may not politically correct, but it is historically correct.

By: Roger L. Simon

Roger L. Simon — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 06:41:41 +0000

Interestingly, as of 8:40PM Pacific time, the WSJ site has not been corrected. Not very impressive editing.

By: Econ-Scott

Econ-Scott — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 03:22:02 +0000

I think Vik Rubenfeld at “The Big Picture Blog” said it best in

The REASON(S) for the Crusades –
http://www.bigpicweblog.com/exp/index.php/weblog/comments/reasons_for_the_crusades

It is hard to imagine that the competing European Powers couldn’t set aside their hatred of each other long enough to extinguish the Piracy and Slavery. Same old rivalries in force today, Until finally U.S. elects another Jefferson and Madison …

By: Stephen

Stephen — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 03:18:01 +0000

Is there any lower life form than a ‘reporter’? Bernard Lewis is, if anything, overly generous towards islam. He regards those periods when Jews were allowed to live as dhimmis under Islam as wonderful times. Few were beheaded. Still, he recognizes the danger posed by currend day Islamic jihadis.