Dershowitz’s lead.“[Finkelstein] charges his ownmother with being a Nazi col-laborator,” Dershowitz tellsFelshman. This is low indeed.And quite sick. But the sicknesshere is Dershowitz’s, notFinkelstein’s. As well asFelshman’s for having served it up.

On account of this alone,Felshman owes both NormanFinkelstein and the readerssome form of emendation.Whether any will be forthcoming is the Reader’s busi-ness. Still, I’ll wager that theReader won’t place it on pageone. Such privileged space isreserved for people who want to call Norman Finkelstein ananti-Semite. A neo-Nazi. AHolocaust trivializer. And worse.

Finally to page 28, the onlypage on which Felshman comesclose to dealing with somethingimportant. The fact of the mat-ter is that Alan Dershowitzspent the better part of the past 12 months employingrepressive, thuggish tactics,including the threat of litiga-tion (How many times do yousuppose Dershowitz can remindthe people he’d like to silencethat if he sues them he’ll “own”them?), to frighten twoAmerican publishing housesaway from the manuscript thatbecame (even with its lawyerlydeletions and revisions) Beyond Chutzpah. And whatdid Jeffrey Felshman and theReader make of it?

Rather than taking AlanDershowitz to task for resortingto these tactics, it is NormanFinkelstein whom the Readermakes answer for himself—Finkelstein being the “equiva-lent of a neo-Nazi,” as theReader permits Dershowitz to

30 CHICAGO READER | SEPTEMBER 9, 2005 | SECTION ONE

continued from page 3

CHICAGO READER | SEPTEMBER 9, 2005 | SECTION ONE 31

call him one last time.Quite the contrary. In

numerous interviews and com-mentaries, as well as in thebook Beyond Chutzpah,Finkelstein has emphasizedthat his abiding concern is“Israel’s shameful human rightsrecord in the OccupiedTerritories and the misuse ofanti-Semitism to delegitimizecriticism of it.”

Clearly the list of the intel-lectual and emotional weaponsused to intimidate critics of theHoly State needs to be extend-ed—as Jeffrey Felshman’s“Whose Holocaust Is ItAnyway?” attests. If the Readerwere worth what it costs to purchase a single copy at thenewsstand, this publicationwould have done somethingdramatically different with theconflict between AlanDershowitz and NormanFinkelstein than to followDershowitz’s lead.

David PetersonEvergreen Park

Ink Well by Ben Tausig

School’s InACROSS 1. One of Chekhov’s “Three Sisters”5. Converted Baath house?9. Unmoving

14. Place15. Half a sitcom send-off16. Loverboy17. Character in shorts19. Hans Blix, e.g.20. Informal cafe21. Court decision23. Some conjunctions24. Barbecue leftovers?25. Montana’s long-time target28. Second or reverse29. Whence some rabbits30. Interview With the Vampire

vampire31. Go by34. Surgeon’s opening?35. Web feed letters38. She’s a sheep39. Scored, so to speak41. Spirited Away heroine42. Wagner work

44. DJ’s transitions47. Pacers brawler Ron49. Even so50. Short cut54. Former Christian Coalition leader56. Twinkie filling57. Second person person58. Networker’s pursuits59. Swarmed60. Enteric bacteria62. “The Da Vinci Code” (2006) director64. En _____65. Penguin scourge66. Just beat67. Twisted expression?68. Gas on the Strip69. Act

DOWN 1. Insult to grandma2. Be a go-between3. Kyoto entertainer4. No-frills5. Subcontinental prefix6. Indian author Santha Rama _____7. Low socks8. See 40-Down9. Org. with an April deadline

10. Just as good11. Honored retiree12. Paranoid period13. Third X, in a game18. Decade divs.22. The Daly show?25. Pokes fun26. Big name in matchmaking: var.27. School founded in 144029. Hem’s partner32. Boxer’s necktie?33. Like a certain prank victim’s house35. Wrigley din

LAST WEEK: CROSSING THE FINISH LINE

53. Formed a union55. Fortune named it “America’s

Most Innovative Company”from 1996 to 2001

56. Lay position at 55-Down59. The Smiths’ Louder _____ Bombs60. Minimal pair?61. Comparative ending63. Certain GI

36. Tagger’s tool37. Free40. 8-Down, publicly43. Nauseate45. Navy Pier, some say46. Exploited, slangily48. TNT part51. Shot again52. Surface