I wonder if this had anything to do with it?
http://sandbox.blog-city.com/chas_freemans_saudi_fable.htm

Yes, well, of course, Democracy for non-Jewish Israeli nationals doesn't grab Senator Schumer's interest nearly as much as sending $15 million U.S. taxpayer dollars to the state of Israel every day. How long can the U.S. afford to bleed money into the Israeli apartheid state?

It's getting high time to cut Schumer loose. From Wall Street to the mid-east this guy is a serious drag on progress.

Hey, don't blame Chuck for being a longtime GNR fan.

"The truly unforgivable mistake of the Chinese authorities was the failure to intervene on a timely basis to nip the demonstrations in the bud… I do not believe it is acceptable for any country to allow the heart of its national capital to be occupied by dissidents intent on disrupting the normal functions of government, however appealing to foreigners their propaganda may be."

Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair announced today that Ambassador Charles W. Freeman Jr. has requested that his selection to be Chairman of the National Intelligence Council not proceed. Director Blair accepted Ambassador Freeman’s decision with regret.

Posted by: S Brennan | March 10, 2009 4:46 PM

The Lobby just makes the case against itself. You hardly need to argue it any more.

possible replacements: Norm Finkelstein, David Irving, Suha (Sue) Arafat, Ieng Sary

Ezra and Spackerman have suggested that, regardless of how Freeman ended up, the effect of this whole "controversy" would be a chilling on public discourse.

Well, we can do our part and act the opposite. Voice concerns and criticism of Israel when we have them, and do so without apology.

I also note that many in the blogosphere, and even an MSM figure like The Other Klein, have already begun giving the finger to the Likudnik lynch mobs. Heck, Andrew Sullivan seems to have lost his patience with them big time, friend or no friend of Marty Peretz.

Ezra and Spackerman have suggested that, regardless of how Freeman ended up, the effect of this whole "controversy" would be a chilling on public discourse.

Freeman's 'fuck this for a lark' statement is probably the most explicit callout of the American Likud and its veto on government. And most veteran for-pol observers, as Laura Rozen reports, see this as the first shitty outcome of many shitty outcomes to follow.

"possible replacements: Norm Finkelstein, David Irving, Suha (Sue) Arafat, Ieng Sary"

Anonymous
_____________________________

Anonymous seems like a bad name to give a child. It seems like they all grow up into nasty, vindictive, hateful cowards.

I can imagine why you wouldn't want your name to be associated with a comment like that. Still, pretty pathetic though.

You: "Chuck Schumer is taking credit, which will be no surprise to readers aware of his career-long interest Chinese democracy promotion."

Schumer: “Charles Freeman was the wrong guy for this position. His statements against Israel were way over the top and severely out of step with the administration. I repeatedly urged the White House to reject him, and I am glad they did the right thing.”

I take it you were being sarcastic.

Btw, I'm not being sarcastic.

I always wondered if AIPAC and it's fellow travellers have really thought about the long-term effects of doing their best to try and convince people that Elders of Zion is a documentary would be.

Do they really think turning their people into comic-book villains is, on balance, going to be a good thing?