"It turns out that one Linda Chavez, the rightwinger whose bread-and-butter is using her Hispanic last name to bash Latinos and "illegals" "
"Both were pretty standard Jewish neocons, "

Stalin's Last Crime: The Plot Against the Jewish Doctors, 1948-1953 By Jonathan Brent, Vladimir Pavlovich Naumov:
"Stalin’s interest in names was not new.
During the anti-cosmopolitan campaign artists and writers of Jewish origin who had adopted Russian pseudonyms were routinely unmasked as Jews in the press."

I hate the term "neo-con". It's so 70's.

It has no relevance now and I'm not sure why anybody uses it.

I have to say that I thought that the Jerusalem highway post, following up on the front-page NYT's article, addressed a timely, critical and troublesome issue. I thought the thread that followed was, at best, bizarre. That said, I restate that I am troubled by the concept of pulling whole posts and entire comment threads. It's a private site, I know, but still . . .

Sorry to confuse you destor. My point is being made to MJ, where it is made best, on a post which follows his previous post which, for whatever reason, has just disappeared--comment thread and all-- without explanation.

I do also happen to have a couple of good guacamole recipes.

MJ, I don't think you are right about Chavez bashing illegals. As far as I know, she is a big supporter of comprehensive immigration reform who has been subjected to offensive namecalling from conservative circles because of her stand.

FYI: For folks allergic to avocadoes, green peas work pretty well as a base for "mock-guac," too.

Points taken destor.

Davai - you really know your Stalinist history! It is interesting that, in spite of the fall of the Marxist/Leninist Communist system, that type of thinking is still around and even spreading, particularly among so-called "progressive" types. I recently reread Arthur Koestler's "Darkness at Noon" and it certainly explains how certain "peacenik" types in Israel keep clinging to suicidal policies even after they have repeatedly been proven to bring disaster on both Jews and Arabs.

She's still hideous. I haven't been able to listen to her ever since she came on the stage in Reagan's first term back when.

Something about AIPAC puzzles me. It is true they are bipartisan and it makes sense that they fired Gersten if he was too closely associated with the Republicans. But their behavior at the last convention contradicts that. I heard they gave Cheney a standing ovation but booed Pelosi. What gives here? And why do the Democrats keep on pledging fealty to such a blatantly right wing organization?

Destor, don't you realize, we tried offering them chips and salsa, and the terrorists still hate America (or Israel, or freedom, or your message here). And now you want to offer them guacamole? When will you learn?

john

http://www.haberarts.com/

Here's Chavez taking heat from the right on immigration:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Y2UxNmQ0NDBjYmU3MjkzYzc1ODAzMzFhYmY3ZjFlNTc=

Even conservatives become liberals on issues that personally affect them.

My guess that Josh was ashamed of MJ's comments where he suggested that Jews don't have connection to this country (or something like that).

"Actually, he said that some right-wing Orthodox Jews in New Jersey lack a sense of connectedness to America at large. He was talking about a tiny fringe of right-wing Jews like yourself."

No, it's not what he said. He really was talking about much bigger slice of American Jews.

"TPM people cant stand the stench of racial hate that emanates from you."

Yes, for you and majority of MJ's admirers, Israel existence is racial hate,
Israel = apparteid. I'm a supporter of Israel, therefore from your point of you, I'm racist and apparteider.

....

Tell you what, now that I think about it......whenever some corrupt loon
puts a political party of a foriegn power, or a foriegn power, before US interests, lets by all means mention what crackpot bunch of god thugs they also swear fealty to.
Just to be fair.

Here is my challenge for AIPAC's haters.
Take a look at
http://aipac.org
and find something untruthful, unreasonable or something that is against US interests

Being Democrat or Republican is no problem for both the neoCONS and loyal followers of AIPAC. After all, what's in a name?

That their causes tend to mingle and come together at points like two steams intersecting on the way to the same river is beneficial to both causes.

As Americans have found out (the hard way) since last Fall's mid-term elections, there is basically no difference between Dems and Repubs.
The majority of both Dems anbd Repubs belong to one party: The Corporate War Party.

Both parties have ulterior motives that have nothing to do with serving the people of this former democratic republic.

To Mr Don K--I have come to realize that your viewpoint is far away from mine, so I would appreciate it if you would either not rate my comments at all, or give them a low rating, because I am interested in gauging the reaction of those who are active in this group to what I write. I don't understand why you give me and others "5" ratings all the time.

Why isn't anyone saying that the Irish/American society, some of them sent money to Sinn Fein, outs America second?

Well, if the Irish/American society was trying to drag us into war with the United Kingdom, and if Congress and Presidential candidates were taking them seriously, and everyone else was afraid to speak up lest they be accused of anti-Irish racism, then I would feel the same way about them that I feel about AIPAC.

Looking over AIPAC's front page and the directly linked pages, I see a lot about what is good for Israel but very little about what is good for America. Support for sanctions on Iran and continued military aid to Israel are framed in terms of Israel's safety and security, not America's.

I think that American foreign policy should be made in the best interests of the majority of the American people. This means that special interests like the Cuban exile lobby, the Israeli lobby, and corporate executives asking for special favors should all be excluded.

They did hold America's interests second. The money raised for the IRA, the gunrunning, the hiding of terrorists, damaged our alliance with the U.K.

"All but 2 or 3 think you are a racist crackpot and don't belong here."

Notice, that according to MJ, people who openly advocate destroying Israel, (majority of MJ supporters here) belong here.

JohnW1141: "So MJ, what's the weather for today?"

MJ: "John, I understand its gonna be cloudy with a lot of rain."

Seer of all that is anti semitic: "MJ is obviously hoping it floods Israel!"

I'm here in Israel where calling people Jew-haters, Nazis and the rest is off-limits.
I think the best thing TPM can do is either ban these guys or TPM regulars should refuse to engage them.
I was at a meeting at Tel Aviv University of people trying to come up with new strategies to end the occupation. A bunch of rightwingers showed up (more than the whole Davai, Bar K "crowd:" of 3 at TPM). Everybody just ignored them.
They yelled for awhile but then all left but one who sat there taking notes or something.
Without anyone saying not to engage them, no one did. It's a good approach.
Ignore the crazies.

davai: But did you find that anything that they advocate is unreasonable or wrong for America?

Support for Israel, especially the uncritical support that currently exists, is not in U.S. national interests. Our only real interest in the Middle East is in ensuring a steady flow of oil at market prices. Propping up Israel detracts from that by angering virtually all of the oil-producing states. It also serves as a rallying point for anti-American terrorists.

Israel gets a lot out of the U.S.-Israel alliance. I don't see what America gets.

How about calling people racists?

The old "Five million Frenchmen can't be wrong" line. I would appreciate it, MJ, in light of your recent revelation to us (or me, at least) that your true motivations in criticizing Israel and its supporters like AIPAC in the US, is that they are supposedly endangering your position as a Jew in the US, then could you explain why do you write fairly regularly in the Jerusalem Post, (which is NOT a "progressive" newspaper as has been pointed out in this group) and why you do not state the real reasons for your harsh criticism in that forum?

" Davai use TPM as their personal racism disseminator."

Yes, I'm an supporter of Israel, therefore according to your twisted logic I'm racist as most American Jews and Americans in general.
Other that your twisted logic, you can't point to anything racist that I wrote.

However, you've shown openly your hate for Jewish people and people of Israel. You constantly stoke antisemitism with your comments.
The way you brought "Jewish" and "AIPAC" to this topic is totally disgusting and antisemitic in the best traditions of Hitler or Stalin or Breshnev press.

There are several other people on TMP who post on I-P topics. In general they have the same position as you.
However, they can express their view without showing hate for Israeli people and hate for American Jews. Somehow you just can't hide your hate.

Bottom line, you didn't find on that website anything objectional. So you are not against AIPAC, you are against US support for Israel in general.

"Our only real interest in the Middle East is in ensuring a steady flow of oil at market prices."
Israel does a lot to help here, but it's a subject for another discussion.

Actually, MJ's shift in the nature of his criticism from the old "we have to force Israel to capitulate to Arab terror for her own good", to the more recent "Israel, AIPAC and the 'ethnic-single issue'-voting-Jews in the US are endangering ME and mine in the US" actually clarifies a lot to me, particularly why he never criticizes blatantly anti-Jewish and anti-Israel comments seen here (e.g. the old "Zionism is a racist, ethnic cleansing movement" line).
The reason is that MJ is under pressure to continually "prove" himself to the supposedly "progressive" circles that he has chosen to hang out with that he is not one of "THEM"-the supposedly (in these "progressive's" eyes) "primitive, obscurantist, racist, bigoted, ethnocentric" JEWS. A modern reply of what was heard in Berlin in 1930...."it's THEM, the primitive Ostjuden from Poland that they don't like....we can convince them that WE are loyal, we fought in the Great War, we speak the native language properly, we are cultured, we read Goethe and Schiller, we love Wagner, we are clean-shaven, we don't wear long coats, etc. Once we convince them that we are not like those dirty Ostjuden, then they will understand that we are LOYAL in spite of what they are saying about us now, which is obviously ridiculous". Good luck, MJ.

I'm breaking my own rule about not responding to BarKy.
He writes: "MJ is under pressure to continually "prove" himself to the supposedly "progressive" circles that he has chosen to hang out with that he is not one of "THEM"-the supposedly (in these "progressive's" eyes) "primitive, obscurantist, racist, bigoted, ethnocentric" JEWS."

No, I don't. I don't think anyone on the left considers me a rightwing Jewish chauvinist and the people on the right think I'm a self-hating Jew! But as Woody Allen once said: "It's not me I hate. It's Jews like you."

Well, I don't hate anybody. But I do have pity on paranoid Jews who still think it is 1942 and that we are all about to be shipped to Auschwitz. I think it's a form of mental illness which can and should be treated.

Actually, it is quite permissible for "progressives" (i.e. Leftists) to call their political opponents Nazis. Ben-Gurion said Menachem Begin was "just like Hitler". Prof Moshe Zimmerman (a "progressive") called the kids of the National Religious Benei Akiva youth movement "just like the Hitlerjudend". Or they themselves conciously adopt Nazi attitudes, like when "progressive" Israel Prize winning sculptur Yigal Tumarkin said "when I see the Haredim (Ultra-Orthodox) and their kids, I can understand the Nazis". Israel is very insistent on "freedom of speech" for post-Zionist Establishment "progressives", if not for others.

When you where at Tel Aviv University, did you or any of the "progressives" who were dealing with ways of "ending the occupation" (which "occupation", 1948 or 1967?) realize that the very ground you were standing on, at TAU, was the former Arab village of Sheikh Munis, and the owners of that land are now languishing in a refugee camp in Gaza (most likely) and I can assure that TAU didn't give them a single dime for it? Now, I have no problem with it because they started the war, and they, like the Sudeten Germans expelled by the Czechs in 1945, had to face up to the consequences of their aggression, but YOU, as a "progressive" who "wants to end the occupation" must realize that those Arabs from Sheikh Munis view the land you were standing on as being just as "occupied" as anything in Judea/Samaria. Did any of you address this issue, which is the core issue of the Arab/Israeli conflict, NOT the "occupation" 1967?

From the Washington Post:

"Chavez was the staff director of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights under President Ronald Reagan from 1983 to 1985, giving her a prominent platform to talk up traditional family values, to criticize affirmative action and to debate comparable pay for men and women. Gersten, meanwhile, became political director of AIPAC, the powerful pro-Israel political committee."

"you change the subject, just as you did here"

What you are talking about?

Yes, I want Israel to be judged by the same standards the rest of the world is judged.

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

I wonder if Hitler ever said Hitler was just like Hitler, especially in the springtime? Seems like everyone else uses it. Arafat was just like Hitler to Begin.

Depending on one's political analysis, the National Socialist German Workers' Party was either far left or far right, so I suppose either rightists or leftists can claim the other side is acting like Nazis.

Yawn.

--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

I came to this thread expecting some good old bashing of Repubicans who hate government except when they can use it to line their pockets, and I'll I got was a bunch of fanatically pro-Zionist trolls.

Be careful there John you might be branded anti semitic by Davai and BarK. These 2 just can't understand that some people in this country, you know the one with freedom of speech somewhere on some important document,can criticize Israel for their policies against Palestine and still not be, in their eyes, an anti semite. That being said I'm sick and tired of the American government's whole hearted support of the Israel right or wrong crowd. Now that will put me squarely in the sights of the above mentioned, as MJ put it, TROLLS.

Englands brutal, sometimes genocidal 800 year occupation of Ireland deserved to be opposed. Individual citizens raised funds & supported the IRA.
Britain had its own AIPAC like influence over the US in that fight, for a while. But they were blunted by US citizens acting to influence the US governments stance.
I wonder how many years you'd get today for "abetting terrorism" after Bush & the laws passed since AIPAC & what itfronts for has become a branch of government?
I raised funds & supported the Salvadoreans & Nicaraguans against US backed thugs.
In niether cases, were the workings of the US State hyjacked to do the bidding of a foriegn power.
Can you see the difference, or are you gibbering about antisemitism?

Kathyg,

These 2 just can't understand that some people in this country, you know the one with freedom of speech somewhere on some important document,can criticize Israel for their policies against Palestine and still not be, in their eyes, an anti semite.

What a shame that calling someone an antisemite is covered by the same speech clause of the First Amendment, huh. 

Meanwhile, much of the same people who have no problem hurling accusations of treason and racism at Israel, Jews and Zionists stroke their own sense of martyrdom at being accused of antisemitism.  May there be no end to the delicious irony of free speech.

White Falashim? Slap me with injera.

--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

Maybe that's why they don't use forks...?

Frankly, I think at this point we should be passing around the tej.

Maybe it is because of the "you see, one of their own is saying it, so we won't be accused of antisemitism" syndrome.

And these Jew haters are whom?
--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

Are they all also neocons?

davai said:

I'm still curious why MJ post attract so many
Jew-haters, and not posts of others left wing TMP contributers?

Refer to post on MJ and weather forecast.

Fanatic; M J Rosenberg, hmmm, M J Rosenberg, hmmm.

Look at that, he has a J, and an E in his name, and if you turn the letter M upside down its a W.

The last 4 letters are "berg".

Its obvious; MJ is accusing the Jews of pushing the iceberg in front of the Titanic!

One must be sensitive to diversity, and recognize that in Salt Lake City, Jews are Gentiles.

Irishmen who have rejected their religion are Jews.

1. Single at 30


2. Spent evenings raising a jar with the bhoys.


3. Mother thought was God.

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Let him who is without sin cast the first stone..."

B*O*N*K

"Motherrrrrr!"

Linda Chavez, Elaine Chou, what's in a name? Being Secretary of Labor in a Republican administration is a part-time job anyway. I think they spend their afternoons doing bicycle deliveries for delicatessens.

John,
It's very good idea.
Before posting here any charges, Iraq Survey Group needs to take a look and decide if they are true.
The following charges have to be approved by them:
anti semitic
racism,
apparteider
lichudnick,
right winger,
neocon,
Jewish neocon,
Jewish lack of connection to countries they live in,
not patriotic,
Israel first,
Jewish parasite,
etc.....

Dan K appears to be on a noble mission. Keeping trollrated comments safe for the perusal of lurkers anywhere any time. Kind of a Mario Savio for the internet age.

Oh, since I probably wouldn't have believed it myself, see the Ark.

That is an excellent comment Zionista :) You get a 5!

Please, all of you... we're supposed to be picking on Anne Marie Slaughter, not each other!

thosethingswesay.blogspot.com

It goes without saying, of course.

I don't suppose you will ever lower the intensity of your loathing of MJ long enough to deal with the reality, on an American political site, of American citizens that feel no special loyalty to Israel, but also have no special reason to want it to disappear?

When I deal with the navigational system on a fishing boat, I don't know if I'm being cosmopolitan or not. I do want to see more evidence that a close relationship with Israel, regardless of political or emotional ties, is to the net security advantage of the United States. There indeed has been a special relationship with Britain, since those little spats around 1812. The US-UK relationship has a solid tradition of mutuality, but I simply don't see anything more than convenience, and possible liability, with Israel.

Apparently, you think it's more important to diss MJ than it is to convince neutral people that it's in the geopolitical interest of the US, in today's world, to maintain a strong relationship with Israel.

As a teenager, I had a slightly older friend who protected me from a school bully. One day, the bully cornered me against a locker, while my friend was in the shower. The preceding summer, I had learned a thing or two, and, after the bully was on the floor, clutching his groin, and badly needing clean underwear and Ace bandages for several joints, my friend had concluded I had grown up. I didn't need nuclear weapons to establish that.

--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

Zion,

since I don't often see charges of treason, backstabbing and dual loyalty*, but I do see charges of anti semitism often, I'm making it an ad hoc committee concerned with the identification of the anti semitism charge. Maybe I just don't hang out in places that throw those charges around regularly.

*I did not say I 'never' saw these charges.

When I worked in a Jesuit school, I did get a different version. One day, three Fathers General, the Franciscan, the Dominican, and the Jesuit, died the same day. St. Peter welcomed them and said they had lived truly fine lives, and he'd reward them with a special vacation offer before they got their wings and harp. They chose to go to the Nativity.

Peter agreed, but urged them not to intervene.

Well, they all got excited. First, the Franciscan broke, and went to the animals in the yard and started preaching in their languages. A bit later, the Dominican couldn't stand it, and went into the inn and started preaching the glory of law.

Try as he might, the Jesuit snapped. He went into the manger, found a familiar figure, put his arm around his shoulder, and said, "Now Joe, about the boy's education..."



A teaching nun happened to be having lunch with us, and this recalled a mysterious figure she had gotten in a child's drawing of the scene. She couldn't figure out this rather rotund figure. On asking, the artist explained, in a huff, "That's Round John Virgin."

--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

Kathyg,

after reading posts on this site for many months I have no doubt there are people that seem to go over every post with a scanning electron microscope to find a subatomic particle they can identify as anti semitism.

I'm not sure that I can add much to this discussion.

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

hcberkowitz said:

With your respect to your ability to shame MJ, I suggest, borrowing from Richard Condon, that your disdain would have the approximate cloaking effect of rubbing a 79 cent jar of vanishing cream into the flight deck of an aircraft carrier.

Howard must have had a bowl of Humor Nut Cheerios for breakfast this morning :-)

I shorten things because I dislike typing and also because I'm the worst typist on the internet.

As you wish, Zionista it is.

davai,

those of us who have been members of this website over a year and have memories of M.J.'s 3rd posting on this site could find much ironic hilarity in your comment and the comments like it over the last months on M.J.'s threads.

You obviously have no clue that this happened:

Anti-Semitism Lives! by M.J. Rosenberg, TPMCafe, July 15, 2006

Posting this last piece here has been an education....

....

So it's quite the surprise to see the vile Jew-baiting directing at me for simply saying that Israel has the right to defend itself against Hezbollah while restating my view that Israel must negotiate immediately with the Palestinian to implement UN Res 242.

Now I understand you Jew-haters out there prefer the term anti-Zionist. Yeah, yeah. But this litle device is about as convincing as when white supremacists, homophobes and other haters argue over semantics. If you want to see the State of Israel eliminated, a nation with 6 million Jews living in it, you are advocating the mass murder of Jews. And you know that.

Anti-Zionism, as used by the likes of the posters here, is anti-Semitism....

....

...what I see here is pure and simple race hatred. Frankly, if I saw any of you walking down the street, I'd hide my kids. You are old fashioned anti-semites, what my father-in-law would have called pogromchiks. I suspect Jews are not the only minority you despise. Haters don't usually confine themselves to one group.

Get yourselves over to Aryan Nation where you belong.

I recommend to all relative newbies to M.J.'s threads that you check that one out thoroughly, including the comments.

Yes, that's M.J., trying to "shame" members of TPMCafe into admitting they are anti-semitic.

You and other of the more recent regular commenters on M.J.'s are obviously not aware of that thread, the havoc it caused on this site, so much so that Josh Marshall made several front page posts afterwards on how there was too much name-calling and vitriol stemming from the Israel threads and on what appropriate behavior should be.

It's sadly ironic about internet discussions on the Israel topic that no one really accomplishes much except talking over one another and that end communication is nil. It's the same thing over and over, so many of you simply seem to disagree because of the language you use and because of the labeling you assign to people because of the language they use, not what they actually believe, the majority speechfying to the moon and not to others.

It is a metaphor for the real situation, and I must sadly say that if M.J. can't break through to a few people on a website that he actually does have some common cause with them, then I have to very much doubt that he has any promise in accomplishing anything as a communicator or negotiator in the real situation.

P.S. for M.J.: It is not wise to expunge threads from your record. By doing so, you might end up turning yourself into a caricature.

lally,

However, no self-respecting tranny would ever suggest substituing green peas for avocado in a guacamole recipe.

YUCK! GAACK! BLETCH!

I bet you say that to all the girls!

But seriously folks...  I don't usually like to put forth personal information in a forum such as this.  But unfortunately, avocado makes my face blow up.  Fortunately, I have creative friends.  One of whom showed up at some gathering or another in the fairly distant past with a mock-guac made from green peas.  And it was really good.  I'm still not sure exactly what all went in that stuff, but I'm here to tell you that the spices are everything.

After more thought on the above, I feel driven to add this note for M.J.:
if one cannot manage somehow to inspire/control reasonable communication and discourse between a relatively mild set of adversaries on the topic on a website, without dismissing them, name calling, expunging or even inflaming things further, then why should anyone take your opinions and abilities on the topic in the real world seriously? Some of those involved in the real world problem are much more far gone that what we see here. Have you sold out to "hits" or are you still interested in finding solutions? Isn't dismissing passionate believers on one side or another with labeling a cop out?

It's sadly ironic about internet discussions on the Israel topic that no one really accomplishes much except talking over one another and that end communication is nil. It's the same thing over and over, so many of you simply seem to disagree because of the language you use and because of the labeling you assign to people because of the language they use, not what they actually believe, the majority speechifying to the moon and not to others.

Not only is the discussion repetitive, artappraiser; it's increasingly insulated from the world of actual events, and focussed mainly on Jewish intramural strife.

Good Jews, bad Jews; right Jews, left Jews; up Jews; down Jews; fake Jews, real Jews; dark Jews, light Jews; rooted Jews, deracinated Jews; in Jews, out Jews; Jewish Jews, goyische Jews - it's all a bit too much inside Jewish baseball for me.

But people are of course free to talk about whatever catches their fancy.

Dan K says it exactly right. He's tired of these posts which are all about "Good Jews, bad Jews; right Jews, left Jews; up Jews; down Jews; fake Jews, real Jews; dark Jews, light Jews; rooted Jews, deracinated Jews; in Jews, out Jews; Jewish Jews, goyische Jews - it's all a bit too much inside Jewish baseball for me."

He's convinced me. Yeah, I've said it before but, until something new happens in the Middle East, this is my last post on the subject.

We have a Presidential election coming up. This past weekend I saw "Sicko" and "No End In Sight." There are other issues. And I'll be writing about them.

PS: If I break this vow, call me on it. But I don't think I will.

During the Cold War, there was a very clear intelligence benefit to the US from Israel, and a quid pro quo on military equipment. We now buy some of the most dreaded equipment for cash from the Soviets, along with manuals and training. In much of international affairs, the question is what have you done recently.

While there is joint military development, such as the Arrow and MTHLEL, there are also liabilities. It should have been quite obvious to Israel that the US considered the airborne warning and control technology in the Phalcon system sensitive; it should not have been the US that had to be heavy-handed in forcing Israel not to sell it to China. Israel's use of cluster munitions that the US has deemphasized or stopped using in open battlefields, against civilian areas in Lebanon, either was idiocy on the part of IDF artillery, or deliberate attempts to establish antipersonnel minefields. For the specific purpose of trying to kill rocket crews, the US itself would use different weaponry, which it sold to Israel.

The liability, fair or not, is to be regarded in many Muslim states as the patron of Israel. If one simply wants healthy democracies, it's hard to find a saner one than Costa Rica, the only state of any size that has no military.

China is not a democracy. Russia is a very flawed one. India is a vibrant if chaotic one. All are more important to the US than Israel, which doesn't mean they are friends. The UK special relationship has been tested thoroughly.

Simply from a standpoint of perception elsewhere in the world, the hard, cold benefits of Israel as a marginal ally are outweighed by the liabilities of current Israeli policy.

--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

I need to see the exact language. MJ has said some neocons are Jewish, and neocon policy, as expressed by PNAC, emphasizes a strong Israel as important to the policy view.

If Zionism is a neocon policy characteristic, it may be even more important to identify non-Jewish neocons, who have no religious reason for their interest. Do we say "non-Jewish neocon and the other kind of neocon?"

Again, I want to see the specific language in which you imply he said all American Jews are disconnected to the US.

Oh -- and saying Jews have no connection to their own country, but presumably to Israel, is anti-Zionist, but not anti-Semitic. It's absurd to suggest all American Jews are disconnected from their own country and loyal to Israel. I don't remember MJ saying anything like that.
--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

Howard,
Now please explain, what policy changes you suggest, what will be the result of this your policy and why will be better for US.

Well, he removed that post, so we don't have a record.
No he didn't say "all".
But as I remember, he said something like many.
"Oh -- and saying Jews have no connection to their own country, but presumably to Israel, is anti-Zionist, but not anti-Semitic"

This is what all antisemites were saying the last 2000 years
Stalin was saying that Jews were roothless cosmopolitian. If this is not antisemitism, then antisemitism doesn't exist.

Not saying "all" is about like saying someone is only "slightly" pregnant. Many is not equivalent to all.

I can't quite parse your next statement, but I will say that an allegation that Jews are loyal only to Israel is absurd in the modern world, and I don't terribly care what Stalin said, or what was said 2000 years ago.

In the Western world, I consider a citizen of any country, whose loyalty to Israel is greater than their loyalty to their own country, is, at best, a coward for not emigrating to Israel and renouncing their other citizenship. I know few Americans who have such questionable loyalty.

Does that make me an anti-Semite? Yes or no? Stop going on about MJ and have the integrity to make accusations to me, if your gonads are up to it.

Hitler wanted the physical annihilation of all Jews everywhere. That is clear anti-Semitism. Lack of support of Israel as a Jewish state is not.
--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

MJ;

I think you are making the right decision. My grandmother of blessed memory would have been embarassed by all this talk about the Jews, and she would say that nothing good could ever come from it.

MJ, I can't help thinking that this is not the proper forum for the important message that you generally lead with. Dan K is right, but not because he's bored of all that Jew talk. He's right because this is not the forum for that talk. All that you ultimately do here is stoke flames, but you don't change hearts. You have suggested to me in the past that the people whose minds me must change--those powerful folks on the right--are not your people, that they are without hope of redemption. But if you truly believe that MJ, I fear that we as a people are destined to a permanent diaspora. And, in any event, the right-wingers aside, there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of American Jews whose views might not mirror Meretz, but who are not right-wingers either.

I say we must take the conventional wisdom on in the belly of the beast, and the beast doesn't dwell in these parts. MJ, I say that you have a critical message to share with our people, and I mean that. But I respectfully submit that that message is not being heard on the TPM Cafe. On the other hand, the IPF is where it's at. Use it MJ and use it well.

I wish you only good things MJ. And I look forward to reading your posts on whatever subject suits your fancy.

Best wishes,

Bruce

Thanks, Bruce. You are a good guy.
MJ

"Lack of support of Israel as a Jewish state is not."
Sure.
Look, you are trying to replace whar MJ said with straw man arguments.

We're are going nowhere.
I'm bored to continue this conversation.

Of course you are bored. Immature people often become bored when they do not get immediate confirmation of their preconceptions.

Your "going nowhere" still means that you won't make a clear statement whether or not a lack of support for the continued existence of the State of Israel as a unique "Jewish state", the essence of the definition of Zionism, equates to anti-semitism when those who don't give blanket support to Israel do not offer any threat to Jews elsewhere in the world.

I will make a separate post in this thread, addressing what I both find Zionista's serious attempt to consider complex issues, and your whining about MJ and handwaving about strawmen that don't follow your often ill-formed positions.
--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]