I read his book back in the 80s. Whenever the Arabs committed an atrocity, there was always a perfectly good explanation. They were good people who were victims of circumstance. If the Israelis killed an innocent ( never on purpose) it was inexcusable. That was the last time I read anything by Friedman.
The difference between Thomas Friedman and Matti Friedman is telling. Both wrote their first books on their self expressive Jewish Israel journey.
Matti served, Tom didn't and it shows.
Matti has something to say because it resonates, he has to live with the consequences of his choices of which he was willing to put his life on the line.
Thomas has nothing to say because he has to live with not being invited to the best parties or being invited back to CNN.
Friedman is to foreign affairs journalism what Paul Krugman is to economics: an ideologue who was right once, has been dining out on that for years, and has been consistently wrong ever since.
I feel like you need to delve further into this. I expected the last part about Friedman bending facts to meet his narrative to be the beginning and not the ending.
What interests me about TF is not the bending of facts to fit the narrative, but his choice of narrative. While sitting in Jerusalem, he wonders why 350 news organizations "focus on Israel" -- and lands on super stories and the master narrative of the Bible. But sitting in New York / Washington, he jettisons that Story for a profoundly different one. ... One day in the future we'll look back on the discipline of economics the way we now look back on alchemy and bloodletting.
Are you referring to Thomas Friedman, the purported New York Times columnist who is actually the full-time foreign minister for J Street?
I wish he was that consistent. He's been wrong so many times it's beyond embarrassing. Journalistic malpractice.
He had a moment or two after 9/11 when he took his head out of the sand, but he quickly put it back in.
I read his book back in the 80s. Whenever the Arabs committed an atrocity, there was always a perfectly good explanation. They were good people who were victims of circumstance. If the Israelis killed an innocent ( never on purpose) it was inexcusable. That was the last time I read anything by Friedman.
Unfortunately true.I used to feel badly how I couldn’t feel comfortable with his writings.
No longer
The difference between Thomas Friedman and Matti Friedman is telling. Both wrote their first books on their self expressive Jewish Israel journey.
Matti served, Tom didn't and it shows.
Matti has something to say because it resonates, he has to live with the consequences of his choices of which he was willing to put his life on the line.
Thomas has nothing to say because he has to live with not being invited to the best parties or being invited back to CNN.
Did I miss anything?
My husband knew him in high school and said he was an arrogant asshole even then.
That made me laugh out loud. 😂
My husband had some run ins with him and really remembers hating his guts.
Alan,
Well said. Tom Friedman hasn't written anything consequencial since Top Gun (86), Princess Bride (87) and Willow (88) were in the theaters.
I knew if we kept at this long enough, we'd find common ground! 😊
Friedman is to foreign affairs journalism what Paul Krugman is to economics: an ideologue who was right once, has been dining out on that for years, and has been consistently wrong ever since.
Where’s the rest of the article? Very interesting so far.
He’s a complete self important idiot!
I feel like you need to delve further into this. I expected the last part about Friedman bending facts to meet his narrative to be the beginning and not the ending.
What interests me about TF is not the bending of facts to fit the narrative, but his choice of narrative. While sitting in Jerusalem, he wonders why 350 news organizations "focus on Israel" -- and lands on super stories and the master narrative of the Bible. But sitting in New York / Washington, he jettisons that Story for a profoundly different one. ... One day in the future we'll look back on the discipline of economics the way we now look back on alchemy and bloodletting.
Never liked him. Uneducated in Torah. No thanks. You are superficial Jewish
Friedman is a putz