Jed, you have bought into the logic that Israel can not be criticized
without being anti-Semitic. In fact, even many Jews are unhappy by the
policies of Israel. Critiquing the policy of Israel is no more being
anti-Semitic than critiquing Bush is being anti-American.
As for the US harming Israel, we have supported them against the
Palestinians in every way, including supporting their policies and
giving them money and arms. As is obvious to any thinking person, the
conflict will not be resolved by a one sided approach, which the Bush
administration especially has supported. Other administrations tried a
more balanced approach, but were frustrated by the unwillingness of both
sides to compromise. When I say the Bush administration is dominated by
the policies of Israel, I'm saying Bush is taking a one side position to
the conflict. Of course, this is not in the interest of Israel, but that
is what the Israeli government wants. Now they want us to bomb Iran
because they fear the wrath of their neighbors, thanks to their
policies. Meanwhile, the US has needs and interests that do not involve
Israel, many of which are being jeopardized by our focus on following
the fears of the Israeli government. Why can these issues be debated
without emotion and the use of anti-Semitism?
Ed
Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
The third possibility, which I favor, is that the Bush gang is so
incompetent and so under the domination of Israel . . .
That is outrageous anti-Semitic crap. The Bush administration has done
more to harm Israel than any other in U.S. history. I will grant they
did not mean to harm Israel, but they didn't mean to harm the U.S.
either, or for that matter the people of Iraq either. Claiming they are
dominated by Israel makes about as much sense as claiming they are
dominated by the Iraqi people and politicians.
- Jed
