The following guest post by Phyllis Chesler was written in response to Martin Peretz’ “repellent” views regarding the bi-partisan push toward a presidential pardon for Jonathan Pollard.
Because of the subject matter, the comment thread for this post will remain closed. I haven’t the physical stamina to monitor people’s responses; it’s easier to simply omit that option. If you want to leave a comment on the subject, then
the original post at Ms. Chesler’s website has commenting enabled.
One would-be commenter, who has already looked at the post over at her site sent me an email:
I just read the Chesler piece on Pollard/Peretz.
I can only say I’m stunned and disappointed almost beyond words about Peretz. If there is a somewhere after we leave this life Peretz is going to really have to explain himself. His reaction is interesting because he’s quite familiar with the case. He is - or was - someone who thought that whatever Peretz had to say it couldn’t be “too bad” … but that was before he read Peretz’ own words. Many Americans who used to read
The New Republic back when MP was the editor (i.e, anyone in the US not residing on the cliff end of the Lemming Left) are going to be taken aback. It would seem that the shunning process on the left is so utterly effective it produces the in-extremis position demonstrated by Peretz in his recent essays on Pollard.
You’ll also have to go over to the original post to get her links; it would've been too tiring for me to include them. Besides, I simply didn't want to link to Peretz' fulminations. There are lots of links besides those two URLs leading back to Peretz’ ravings. She has lots of background information for those of you not familiar with Pollard’s case. Ms. Chesler did an admirable job pulling all that information together, but then her work as an investigator of Islam - especially its codified treatment meted out to women - has no comparison in this country for depth of research and grasp of the material - not to mention her modulated presentation of horrific examples. The woman has nerves of steel.
Peretz-the-Leftist Defames Pollard As “Repellent Viper”In the last days of 2010, Martin (“Marty”) Peretz, the recently retired editor and publisher of
The New Republic, published two rambling, hysterical, and gratuitously cruel pieces which strongly advised President Obama not to pardon Jonathan Pollard.
No one, other than his own demons, asked Peretz weigh in on the matter; he could simply have remained silent. After all, Peretz has lived the life of a wealthy, influential, and outspoken Jewish public figure-a life of honor and freedom. Pollard has been dishonored, despised, and imprisoned for 25 years, seven of which he was forced to spend in solitary confinement. He is a very sick man whose supporters have finally, after many hard years, begun to gather serious support for his release.
Noblesse oblige should have required Peretz to maintain a pained silence. Instead, on his own blog at The New Republic Peretz comes at Pollard with 800 pounds of shockingly anti-Semitic language in which he makes the case against the prisoner.

Peretz describes Pollard as “the single repellent figure,” a “sleaze bag transmogrified into not only a hero but a saint,” a “viper,” a “convicted espionage agent … who got paid for his work … His professional career reeks with infamy and is suffused with depravity.”
Peretz also accuses the prisoner of spying for Pakistan-however, there is no evidence of this in the public record.
Peretz not only despises Pollard; he despises his supporters as well and characterizes them as “brazen … professional victims, mostly brutal themselves, who originate in the ultra-nationalist and religious right. They are insatiable. And they want America to be Israel’s patsy.” If one googles “America Israel’s patsy,” the #2 result, right behind Peretz’s article, is a blog by an anti-Semitic conspiracy freak who argues that the Mossad knew about 9/11 in advance and links to an article by David Duke about “Israeli terrorism.”