the argument also begs the question that even if W is the most pro-Israel president in the history of the US, if his policies actually do the most to benefit Israel. Given his level of incompetance, this would be a serious question

Wow, nice job, Kevin--watcher will now have to come and take a dump on this thread.

Kevin, I'm disturbed that you approvingly link to those two clear anti-semites, Klein and Yglesias.

I think the pertinent question is not whether Jews have dual loyalties, but whether Bush does.

His policies certainly are not helping the US.

agreed.

saying being pro-Israel is the same as supporting what its doing now is like a saying its good parenting to never scold your kid. being a good ally doesn't mean blind support. a president who truly helps israel will also help to rein it in when it goes too far.

Americans Jews might also want to keep in mind that many of the President's closest friends - and perhaps the president himself - believe the Armageddon and the End of Times is at hand.

For a refresher on why Jews don't fair well in Bush's Apocalypse-as-foreign policy, see:
"666: Armageddon, Iran and Bush Foreign Policy."

I think the pertinent question is not whether Jews have dual loyalties, but whether Bush does.

Wait, are you suggesting Bush has a loyalty to the US such that having a loyalty to something else would give him "dual loyalties"?

As a Jew, I cringe any time anyone gives a scintilla of credibility to that craven bitch Charon and that fucking Gelertner. And don't get me started on Jonah Goldberg!

Talk about identity politics. But Charen is really talking down to Jewish Americans in this case, assuming they are foolish enough to fall for her shortsighted, ethnocentric view.

But isn’t it nice that Yglesias, Klein, Drum and their ilk see through this immediately? Where I live, that’s a source of relief and hope.

Why do Jews hate Israel?

Ah Global Citizen. Didn't you say the other day that Israeli Jews are "fucking crazy"? I somehow have a hard time believing you're a Jew.

I think the pertinent question is not whether Jews have dual loyalties, but whether Bush does.

I've never understood while you can be an American and still criticise the American government, any criticism of an Israeli government is supposed to be criticism of Israel.

Israel is a series of tubes. It is not a dump truck. Yesterday I ordered an Israeli strike and it only got here last week.

I don't hate Israwl, but I do recognize that the nation is more than a little pathological (even - especially - my relatives who live there.) The nation of Israel - has long since ceased to be a nation of action and instead are a nation constantly in a reactive crouch. This is antithetical to progress at any level.

The Christian position on dual loyalty is pretty clear: "No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other; or else he will be devoted to one and despise the other." - Matthew 6:24

what I typed in the prvious post was: That is not a real question as it is obvious that shrub has no loyalty to the United States or it's constitution.

Well, Bush tells us he listens to "a higher father" for most of his advice, so perhaps he actually is trying to move us to "the final days."

Great. And I had a nice vacation planned for the fall. Oh well ...

Just mained off a check to "Peace Now" - I'm one of those jews. I'm also a half-breed - Jewish Mom, Catholic Dad.

I'm not the only reform jew who says Israeli Jews are fucking crazy - I will just say it out loud and to people who may not agree with me, at the risk of being labeled a self-loathing jew, of course.

Is there an accepted clear-and-bright line for what constitutes "dual loyalty"?

Chrissy: when it comes to government, I like mine "secular" (for example, the U.S. constitution) and unaligned with any "master".

What I don't understand is why White Christian men support the Republican party when it is clear that Bush is just trying to turn this country into one big homo-latino-islamo pinata party.

wait... what thread is this again?

Charen seems to think that everybody else is stupid, so why not American Jews too?

BTW, is Bush the most pro-Israel president because he's killed the most Arabs and Muslims?

Carl:

No more so than FDR / Truman were pro-Chinese for killing the most Japanese.

BTW, is Bush the most pro-Israel president because he's killed the most Arabs and Muslims?

Correct! Tell the man what he wins... A new War!

Yesterday's LA Times had a picture of about 10 Palestinian boys maybe 5 to 8 yr old. They were in a circle observing a little 3 yr old girl, killed by Israeli fire, lying in a still open grave. Their faces didn't register shock or horror or anger. But you could see they were thinking, trying to fit this into their little boy world.

Israel's School for Terrorism: Train em young.

So just to belabor the point for all of you chuckle-headed faux philo-Semites: Everything Bush and Israel are doing in the Middle East will blow back in spades. Israel's insane collective punishment policies only add fuel to Bush's raging ME fires. What is needed and has been needed is for the US to knock Israeli and Palestinian heads together--a heavy stick with the appropriate carrots.

What I find most amusing and bemusing these days is how all the virulent Jew-hater types I grew up with are now gung ho pro-Israeli. Strange.

My own credentials: Bar Mitzvahed in 1960 and kosher for a month or two around that time. But I soon turned to atheism and bacon.

The choices are to support Palestinian terrorists, or Jews just trying to live. Regardless of your affilaitian, you'd be insane to support the party that sides with the terrorists.

Hi all...

There's a new Blog in Town...

http://dollarsspot.blogspot.com

Easy ways to get easy web DOLLARS!!!

I hope u visit me!!!

The First Sino-Japanese War occurred between 1894 and 1895, primarily over control of Korea

The Second Sino-Japanese War occurred between 1931 (proceeding in earnest in 1937) and 1945, from 1941 on as part of World War II

These are however not the only wars/military confrontations between China and Japan, a few others are:

Battle of Baekgang

Mongol invasions of Japan (though not considered a Chinese war by some)

Wokou incursions

Seven-Year War

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Japanese_War

Hi all...

There's a new Blog in Town...

[URL REMOVED]

Easy ways to get easy web DOLLARS!!!

I hope u visit me!!!

Dollars Spot-- Due to the trade deficit, dollars have greatly decreased in value. Can you tell me how to get web Euros????

computer hardware,办公设备,计算机硬件,打印机,复印机,投影机,传真机,一体机
办公设备,计算机硬件,打印机,复印机,投影机,传真机,一体机
复印机行业,复印机科学,复印机知识,复印机新闻,复印机测评
复印机科学
复印机资料
复印机相关资讯,fuyinji news
复印机,copier
复印机产品
复印机
复印机学习
复印机博客
复印机
复印机网站
复印机
fuyinji
复印机
夏普复印机
理光复印机
佳能复印机
东芝复印机
富士施乐复印机
京瓷复印机
柯尼卡美能达复印机
松下复印机
复印机tags

Like they actually care about consistency. Thats the logical fallacy of this post.

Krusty (the Clown), on learning he hasn't had a bar mitzvah: "All this time I thought I was a self hating Jew. Turns out I was just a plain, ol' anti-Semite."

I want to know what "more pro Israel" means. This debate shouldn't go anywhere without that definition.

I like to think that, as a non-Jew, I'm still friendly to Israel. But I don't think the Israelis, much less Bush, are thinking long-term. There are 205,000,000 people in the countries surrounding Israel (Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Palestine, Egypt) and all of about 5,800,000 in Israel. All out war is not a long-term option for Israel, and the time will come when it can no longer insist on exactly the shape of the borders that it wants; there may come a day when it will have difficulty defending itself. The failures of its Army against a bunch like Hezbollah foretells that.

Some other approach is necessary. There was once an approach that depended on support of moderate leaders in the region, but you can kiss that one good-bye now. If Israel can't even realize the peril that its course is driving it into, then I don't know how we can help them.

复印机
夏普复印机
理光复印机
佳能复印机
东芝复印机
富士施乐复印机
京瓷复印机
柯尼卡美能达复印机
松下复印机
复印机tags

Yesterday's LA Times had a picture of about 10 Palestinian boys maybe 5 to 8 yr old. They were in a circle observing a little 3 yr old girl, killed by Israeli fire, lying in a still open grave. Their faces didn't register shock or horror or anger. But you could see they were thinking, trying to fit this into their little boy world.

Israel's School for Terrorism: Train em young.

Earth to geo. It was the Palestians who brought their 10-year old children to observe the corpse.

Think about it: if there were a corpse in your neighborhood, would you bring your 10-year old child to view it? No, the first thing you woul do would be to cover the body.

geo: I was Bat Mitzvahed in 1974, and have never eaten a bacon cheeseburger in my life - or any pork for that matter. Shellfish however, is a different story - I'm culturally jewish, religiously agnostic and I own ONE set of dishes.

I've been making geo's argument since I was twelve and watched Israeli planes bomb a refugee camp near the South Lebanese (Christian) village where I was spending the summer. I had plenty of Jewish friends at home in the States, and argued then and all the way up until now that such attacks don't cure terrorism and only create more hatred, fuelling terrorism.

However this view has always been dismissed by the mainstream. It is percolating up again these days. I'm just sad that nobody has learned anything...

My credentials as a non-Jew-hater - married a Jew, mother-in-law is Jewish, go to temple for bar mitzvahs and occasional High Holy Days. This is not about Judaism. Jews are one more Semitic tribe and I love Semites. This is about political choices and those choices suck.

More on my philo-Semitic credentials - up until this year I've been attacked by fellow Arab-Americans for being a "Jew-lover" and a "Zionist appeaser", 'cause I'm married to a man who is Halachically Jewish and I have argued that Israel isn't the ultimate Evil Empire. Now that Israel has devastated my father's country, and I speak out against that, I know the next thing I'll hear is - you see, those Israelis/Yahud really are everything we said... I've gotten such comments already on my blog.

People are nuts, is all I can say.

34343:

Thank you for your vote for Truman. Very convincing argument. Anyone else?

cmdicely,

you are referred to on NRO's 'the corner' for your post on abortion and Murder.

By Charen's logic, her judgment is that Bush is the best so I need to behave according to her judgment. Since by my judgment Bush has done the most to destroy THIS country of any President, she and Gelernter should be forming a Bush protest squads now.

My blog doesn't seem to show up on the little linkie thing - Dove's Eye View. Used to be devoted to "signs of hope" but after 2 and a half years of blogging amidst the encroaching darkness, I've changed the tag line...

If this is blog whoring, so be it.

little ole jim: in case you haven't noticed wacky fundies are running this country. Wacky fundies who have been blindly supporting Israel. W has been blindly supporting every Israeli action because of some cult like version of Christianity that has no basis in scripture. Whether you like it or not (and I don't like it myself) it's reality.

Didn't you say the other day that Israeli Jews are "fucking crazy"?

I know plenty of USAmerican Jews who share this sentiment. And plenty who do not.

I somehow have a hard time believing you're a Jew.

I somehow have a hard time believing that you know any Jews.

Was there any commentary about Irish 'dual-loyalty' a hundred years ago, when Irish Americans funded the IRA?

George W. Bush a friend of Israel? When you see a friend do something profoundly dumb, you don't just stand on the sidelines and watch the train wreck; you say something like, "As a friend, I think you ought to cut out this crap, now."

As for Mona Charen, I've lost track of the number of years running she's won the Shonda For The Goyim award.

The choices are to support Palestinian terrorists, or Jews just trying to live.

Well, "just trying to live" is not how I would describe American Jews who move to Israel in order to live in the West Bank, barrel down settler-only highways, protected by the IDF, pushing people who have lived on that land for generations out of their homes and off their farms.

There was plenty of fear of dual loyalty during WWII directed at Japanese, German, and Italian USAmericans.

You may remember the internment camps?

American Jews? What about the anti-semitic Israeli jews? Haaretz wants Israel to start a department of peace for Judah's sake.

I wasn't aware of 'dual loyalties' being a slur. Many of us have strong interests in the Middle East and elsewhere and pick sides. Why would jews be any different?

Kevin is frustrated because this will play to the political advantage of the GOP as the pro-Hezbollah sentiments of many on the whacky left come to represent the Democratic party. I suspect Karl Rove hopes Bolton gets abused by the Senate again just so he can use it in places like Florida. If Hillary votes against Bolton again, and she will, it will cost her the votes of some jewish residents in Florida.

That's one reason why so few Senators get elected as President. Hilliary will be making many votes she'd prefer to avoid while the Governors can tap dance on any subject.

ex-liberal,

Have you never been to an open casket funeral? Ever seen children at one?

Paleez, spare those of us with a working brain your idiocy.

George W. Bush a friend of Israel? When you see a friend do something profoundly dumb, you don't just stand on the sidelines and watch the train wreck; you say something like, "As a friend, I think you ought to cut out this crap, now."

Well, that assumes that you even understand that what the friend is doing is dumb... IOW, that you're (general "you," not you specifically; in this analogy GWB) not the dumber of the two friends already, or at least the enabler/instigator. Bush's neocon policies & Israel's bad judgment are sort of a chicken/egg situation, IMO.

John Walker Lindh is serving twenty years in Federal prison for joining the Afghan/Taliban armed forces and fighting against the Northern Alliance, an organization of war lords that was fighting to regain control of the country. Many Americans are doing the same thing now, except they are fighting for the Israeli Defense Forces or moving to occupied territories and arming themselves with automatic weapons that they walk around with to intimidate the local Palestinian population. I think it was the Today Show that earlier this week interviewed an American family that had just moved to Israel. I do not know if these people have dual loyalties or not, but I do know they will not be prosecuted like Mr. Lindh was to score political points.

I do not support Americans fighting with the Taliban or Al Queda and I do not support Americans fighting with the IDF. I would prefer my government treat them equally though.

This is the founding-fathers turned on it's head.

The founding fathers complained about Taxation Without Representation.

Israel's getting Representation (and MASSIVE Subsidies) without Taxation.

Pretty sweet deal eh?

Hostile,

The double standard is everywhere. In the US, donating money to Palestinians lands you in jail. Donate money to Israelis? That's a tax write off.

As a white male, I am only going to support white supremacist groups, because they are indisputably the most pro-white organizations around.

rdw:

Do you think that is equivalent to the kiss-of-death for cmdicely?

O_B_F: Long time no see, you Christian heretic you! how have you been? Mom still tything planned parenthood?

cmdicely,

you are referred to on NRO's 'the corner' for your post on abortion and Murder.

You gotta love the blogosphere.

"Some blogger criticized me, but one of his readers criticized his criticism."

OTOH, considering some of the “substantive”, or at least longer, recent articles on The Corner, like Goldberg quoting himself on how increasing democratic participation is bad, and Rich Lowry openly acting as an AIPAC mouthpiece to report that many people in Beirut have not been killed by Israel's bombing, maybe more pointless one-liners is just what they need to improve the overall quality.

it's hard to take offense at this when you write pieces suggesting that American Jews ought to put aside other considerations and vote for whichever party displays a more dependable support for Israel. Conservatives should take care not to let their own agitprop come back to bite them.

These attempts to muddy the water with lefty spin and damage control will not work. The message of partisan support for Isreal is coming through loud and clear. Some Jews won't care. Many Jews will care intensely.

Basically, you can count on watching the voting percentages for American Jews swing to the center, and then to the right. The effect will be dampened, though, if congressional Democrats continue to give full support to Israel. So we need all the lefties on the blog to phone your legislators. Let them know that their support of Israel must be stopped!

. . . maybe more pointless one-liners is just what they need to improve the overall quality.

Too little, too late.

For today's lesson in nutzo black/white thinkingm American Hawk gives us...

"The choices are to support Palestinian terrorists, or Jews just trying to live. Regardless of your affilaitian, you'd be insane to support the party that sides with the terrorists."

Clearly no other choices could exist.

And ex-liberal posts...

"Think about it: if there were a corpse in your neighborhood, would you bring your 10-year old child to view it? No, the first thing you woul do would be to cover the body."

Funny, we were having a discussion in my family last weekend about open coffin funerals and how it was even customary when my mother was growing up to have the body displayed on the dining room table. Of course, hers was a family of Catholics, probably just a half step removed from muslims in the eyes of people like ex-liberal.

I do not support Americans fighting with the Taliban or Al Queda and I do not support Americans fighting with the IDF. I would prefer my government treat them equally though.

No denying you are a liberal.

Let's see, Al Qaeda kills innocents at every opportunity including 3,000 in NYC.

The IDF kills terrorists

Your government will NEVER treat them equally. Not when the adults are in charge. But please continue to make these arguments and I hope they get you your 15 minutes. Chuck Schumer would have a heart attack as you destroyed Democractic electorial chances.

机票|北京机票|北京飞机票|北京打折机票|北京特价机票|北京航班查询|北京学生机票|北京国际机票|航空公司

酒店
北京五星级酒店
北京四星级酒店
北京三星级酒店
北京酒店
如家快捷酒店
200元以下酒店
可上网酒店

ask doug feith, micheal chertoff(the fucking homeland security chief) about their duel citizenship? and all the spies they just busted last at the state department. please.

Why is it reasonable to Zionists to demand the other side of the debate prove it doesn't "hate" Jews while Zionists are never expected to prove they don't "hate" (meaning want to kill or subjugate) Arabs and Muslims?

Let's not pretend that the IDF and the Mossad are as pure as the driven snow.

Let's remember that Israel is just as capable of attrocity as those they have been fighting with for the last, oh, five thousand years or so. (Every Jewish holiday boils down to one maxim: "They tried to kill us, they failed, let's eat.")

Anyone remember a couple of massacres at a couple of refugee camps named Sabra and Shatilla? Where civillians were slaughtered indiscriminately by the IDF?

ask doug feith, micheal chertoff(the fucking homeland security chief) about their duel citizenship? and all the spies they just busted last at the state department. please.

The IDF is by policy inflicting suffering on Lebanese civilians, including civilians who are apolitical and opposed to Hizbollah already, for the purpose of changing the victims politics.

What makes this not terrorism?

Dual Loyalty is when you work for the US government, media, academia, or any other power base and advocate for YOUR ETHNICITY rather than your country.

Jews on the left swear it isn't so... then why did we end up with an empty suit in the last presidential election.... THE DEMS ARE OWNED BY JEWS AS WELL>>>> AND THEY WON'T PROFFER AN EFFECTIVE ANTI WAR CANDIDATE --

out of loyalty to Israel...

THAT is dual loyalty.

Perle, Wolfowitz, Ledeen - you know the bunch... all should be tried and hung for treason.

Carl: IT's only terrorism if your ox is getting gored...

The IDF kills terrorists

Yep, all those Christian Lebanese baby terrorists.

Let's try this again, shall we? In the current conflict, the crazy, indiscriminate evil Hezbollah has killed more Israeli soldiers than Israeli citizens; the rational, tempered, good Israel, on the other hand, has killed more Lebanese citizens than Hez soldiers.

The willful ignorance of wingnuts is amazing to watch.

***

But really, the real question is why should USAmerican citizens be fighting for a foreign entity, regardless of who the foreign entity gets off on killing?

These creeps should have their citizenship revoked.

Carl:

GC is 1/2 right. Israel is a nation-state (I understand some Arabs don't agree with that, but then we have to get into the defintion of "consensus"). The definition of terrorism is "the unconvention use of violence by a non-state actor for the achievement of political ends." Violence and "terrorism" by nation-states are "wars".

"terrorism" by nation-states are "wars".

More specifically, they are war *crimes*.

Some blogger criticized me, but one of his readers criticized his criticism."

Be fair and accept a compliment.

I don't recall NRO ever linking to a commenter on a blog before. While Ramesh certainly liked the fact you agreed with him, mostly, that would not by itself have been a reason to cite you. He can find agreement in many places on many subjects.

Like Ramesh or not, agree with Ramesh or not, you cannot dispute he's a highly intelligent and sober guy. He would not have linked to your post if he did not find it well thought out and well written. I take more meaning out of actions than words. I think Ramesh gave you high praise by allowing your words and reasoning to stand for him.

BTW: he did mention kevin by name and provide a link making it easy for those following thread to see both 'sides' and make their own opinion.

Israel's getting Representation (and MASSIVE Subsidies) without Taxation.

Let's not forget nearly a third of the Palestinian budget comes from the US government. And nearly all the rest comes from the European Union, or Israel itself.

Google 'Palestinian budget'.

I was in a local pizza joint run by a Lebanese family, and they were watching LBC (the U.S. Lebanese cable channel.)

The head of Hezbollah was being interviewed, and the owner refered to him in a way that suggest that his parentage was illegitimate, I believe the exact quote was "There's the bastard that started the war."

On the other hand, he didn't seem to have warm feelings for the Israeli's either.

I fail to see why American Jews aren't allowed to disagree with the actions of the Israeli government. They're American, first off, which implies a certain freedom of speech and thought. Second, a lot of Israeli's I know disagree with the actions of their government (and looking at their electoral results, unamimity does not seem to be the case.)

Many looking at the present situation think it's bad for Israel, and that Israel would be better off today if GWB had called up and tried to put the breaks off this thing before it jumped the tracks. No other world leader but the POTUS really had a shot at keeping things in check, and he passed.

After the kidnappings, a lot of semi-sane countries in the middle east condemned Hezbollah, but now they're condeming Isreal, and Israel is giving them more ammo every day.

So, I'd say, don't worry about your 'Jewish friendly' credentials. Isreal is a country, we have a right to evaluate their actions. They are fighting a terrorist group, there's no moral equivalency between Israel and Hezbollah, but we do have a right to say that in fighting Hezbollah they've gone to far.

Anyone remember a couple of massacres at a couple of refugee camps named Sabra and Shatilla? Where civillians were slaughtered indiscriminately by the IDF?

No. Do you? Wikipedia:

The Sabra and Shatila massacre (or Sabra and Chatila massacre) was carried out in September 1982 by Lebanese Maronite Christian militias in the Sabra and Shatila (صبرا وشاتيلا) refugee camps. The Maronite forces stood under the direct command of Elie Hobeika, who would later become a longtime Lebanese parliament member and in the 1990s also a cabinet minister. The number of victims of the massacre is estimated at 700-3500 (see below).

The camps were externally surrounded by Israeli soldiers throughout the incident, and the militias had been sent in by Israel to find Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) members. The Kahan Commission, an Israeli inquiry into the massacre established by the Israeli government, found that while the Phalangists alone, and no Israelis, were directly responsible for the massacre, the conduct of the political and military echelon was flawed, and named then Israeli Defence Minister (and future Prime Minister) Ariel Sharon, among several prominent Israelis, as bearing "personal responsibility" for the events.

The United States has defined terrorism under the Federal Criminal Code. Chapter 113B of Part I of Title 18 of the United States Code defines terrorism and lists the crimes associated with terrorism[6]. In Section 2331 of Chapter 113b, terrorism is defined as:

. . . activities that involve violent [or life-threatening acts] that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State and . . . appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and [if domestic] (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States [if international] (C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States . . .

The definition of terrorism is "the unconvention use of violence by a non-state actor for the achievement of political ends."

I don't know that that's "the" definition; American Heritage says "The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons."

As a state is an "organized group", and violations of international law are "unlawful", the use of force or violence in a manner which violates international law (such as when indiscriminate attacks are made affecting civilian populations) by a state with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments is "terrorism", per that definition.

So I should have said "By militai's under the direction and protectioon of the IDF." My error in phraseology, but the net effect is still the same.

I'm Jewish I'm not Isreali nor am I a Zionist.

disputo wrote:
Let's try this again, shall we? In the current conflict, the crazy, indiscriminate evil Hezbollah has killed more Israeli soldiers than Israeli citizens; the rational, tempered, good Israel, on the other hand, has killed more Lebanese citizens than Hez soldiers.

Well, that certainly is the crux of the whole issue. But how can you automatically reach that conclusion, when U.S. media news sources say things like this:

A total of 33 Israeli soldiers have died in the fighting and 19 civilians were killed in Hezbollah's unyielding rocket attacks on Israel's northern towns, the army said.

Or this:

Despite the Israeli offensive, the guerrillas managed to shoot 110 rockets into Israel on Thursday, lightly wounding 20 people and bringing the total of rockets launched to 1,564.

Lindata: Welcome! Another semi-sane jew! Where have you been all my life? :)

I meant "unconventionAL" in that definition, of course. No reputable political scientist would use the term "terrorism" to describe STATE action. "War crimes", yes. "Jack-booted thugs", maybe. "Terrorism"? There's no way.

Yet a rose by any other name...

It's all semantics, Thomas.

sportie,

Since the first quote you post supports my statement, and the second is irrelevent, I can only conclude that once again your illiteracy is causing you to post gibberish.

Well, semantics are important, GC. Call them "war criminals" if you must, but calling Israel "terrorists" makes as much sense as calling you "Pat Robertson".

Ouch! Now that hurts!

Conservatives should take care not to let their own agitprop come back to bite them.

First off, Kevin, since when have the Bush Cultists not blithely abandoned a talking point once it no longer served their purpose, only to pick it up again once it does? We call them "Orwellian" because they seem to use 1984 as an instruction manual.

Second, since when have the Bush Cultists seemed to give a good goddamn abotu the consequences of their policies, let alone their rhetoric?

Sheesh.

George W. Bush a friend of Israel? When you see a friend do something profoundly dumb, you don't just stand on the sidelines and watch the train wreck; you say something like, "As a friend, I think you ought to cut out this crap, now."

Like the French tried to warn us against invading Iraq. And look at the thanks that got them.

War Criminals it is. I can abide with that term. War criminals often use tactics that inspire terror among civillian populations - it's one of the things that makes the qualify as war criminals, after all.

So, I'd say, don't worry about your 'Jewish friendly' credentials. Isreal is a country, we have a right to evaluate their actions. They are fighting a terrorist group, there's no moral equivalency between Israel and Hezbollah, but we do have a right to say that in fighting Hezbollah they've gone to far.

No one has suggested otherwise nor has anyone said jews can't disagree with Israel. The support for this action so far is near 80% here and I think I read closer to 90% in Israel. It's not clear if those 90% in Israel represent only jews but I suspect so if only because it's nearly impossible to get more than 90% of people to agree to anything. I can't imagine if the 20% arab population were polled in proportion the number could possibly be 90%

This tells us 20% of Americans disagree and suggests 10% of israeli jews disagee.

The rub is in the how and why you disagree and if and when you get away from basic facts.

Lindata wrote:
I'm Jewish I'm not Isreali nor am I a Zionist.

Fair enough. And I'm certain there are plenty more Jews who feel similarly.

However, there are also plenty of Jews who feel intense loyalty to Israel. My brother-in-law and my old college roommate, for example.

If you had to guess, what percentage of U.S. Jews fall into each category?

cmdicely,

Hurricane Katrina was an indiscriminate attack against a civilian population.

Israel on the other hand has been attacking Hezbollah and infrastructure that supports Hezbollah.

Your evident need to assert otherwise suggests --what? Faith?

oldgreenguy wrote: Funny, we were having a discussion in my family last weekend about open coffin funerals and how it was even customary when my mother was growing up to have the body displayed on the dining room table. Of course, hers was a family of Catholics, probably just a half step removed from muslims in the eyes of people like ex-liberal. Disputo makes a similar point

Good try, guys, but there's a difference. it's one thing to view a body in a casket after it has been fixed up by the mortician. It's another to see a body bleeding in the street, perhaps with limbs missing and other signs of violence. I certainly don't think you'd bring your young child to view such a horrible sight.

A nationalist culture of chauvinistic militancy is creeping through the United States and Israel. It is becoming a blood cult and, if history is any guide, the end result will not be in anyone’s national interest.

I now think Cormac Mccarthy’s Blood Meridian: Or the Evening Redness in the West is not a book about the Hobbesian bloodlust of the Texas-frontier past, but a novel about the present.

As long as we are insisting that Jews go along with stereotypes, I'm surprised Charen and Gelernter didn't also insist that all Jews:

• Should be Doctors or Lawyers, unless they are married to one or are too busy controlling Hollywood
• If still in School, must be members of the Chess club, and poor at athletics
• Tip 10% or less
• Never pay retail

Meanwhile, WASPs should:

• Dance badly
  
• Join country clubs with only token representation from 'alternate' ethnicities
  
• Pay retail
  

I wouldn't take my child to a public hanging, either, but to a hell of a lot of people in this country a couple of centuries ago, that passed for high entertainment.

Wasn't there a couple of threads about a year ago on how liberals have little to no sympathy or interest in any kind of military view?

Where some article had shown statistically that any military consideration would be out of hand dismissed by a large percentage of leftists, which is why they had lost almost all credibility on security issues?

I think we're seeing that here.

The founding fathers complained about Taxation Without Representation.

Israel's getting Representation (and MASSIVE Subsidies) without Taxation.

Pretty sweet deal eh?

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on July 28, 2006 at 1:12 PM

Yes. You can effectively argue that Israel is not only better represented on Capitol Hill than the District of Columbia, but gets more back as well.

Oh my God, people are referencing Wikipedia. Any source that I could immediately go and change the content of is probably not a safe one to use.

There are several good reasons for Jews to be Republicans. One that Kevin pointed out was that conservatives support Israel more than liberals. Another is that Jews are wealthier than average, so they're voting against their econonic interest. Nevertheless, Jews continue to vote overwhelmingly Democratic. Perhaps one reason is that most Jews prefer liberal social policy.

Thanks jay - I let that pass, figuring the thinking members of this forum would reach that very conclusion. Wiki-fucking-pedia as a reference? If a student referenced that source, instant zero.

Think about it: if there were a corpse in your neighborhood, would you bring your 10-year old child to view it? No, the first thing you woul do would be to cover the body.

Yeah, "ex-liberal," it's the Arabs' own fault they get pissed off when Israelis kill their kids. They're so declasse for not cooperating with the Israelis in covering up their handiwork.

And Charlie, what is it with you and your FDR obsession?

Do you Bush apologists ever get tired of your dishonesty? Shame on you.

disputo wrote:
Since the first quote you post supports my statement, and the second is irrelevent, I can only conclude that once again your illiteracy is causing you to post gibberish.

Oops, sorry. I forgot about your reading comprehension problem. I'll post the quotes again, and I'll add italics for emphasis so you'll be sure to understand. Remember to sound the words out if you get in trouble.

A total of 33 Israeli soldiers have died in the fighting and 19 civilians were killed in Hezbollah's unyielding rocket attacks on Israel's northern towns, the army said.

Despite the Israeli offensive, the guerrillas managed to shoot 110 rockets into Israel on Thursday, lightly wounding 20 people and bringing the total of rockets launched to 1,564.

Of course, it goes without saying that these are just two random quotes that were right at hand. There are hundreds of others that support my point, which I can get if necessary.

Be fair and accept a compliment.

Being complimented for being capable of understanding something fairly straightforward as a way if of highlighting that someone else failed to do so is like being complimented for not tripping over your shoelaces by someone in the process of their pointing to someone else who did trip over their shoelaces; there is, to me, something very odd about pointing to a criticism of your work on the web if you aren't going to substantively engage with it, or pointing to a defense of your work only to say you agree with it. Maybe I'm weird that way; certainly, drive-by linking is clearly fairly common in the blogosphere.

I don't recall NRO ever linking to a commenter on a blog before.

"First commenter on a blog directly referenced by The Corner." Hmm, well that's one for the minor fame file.

Many of us have strong interests in the Middle East and elsewhere and pick sides.

Cheering for, and giving 3 Billion dollars a year out of the US Treasury (ie. 'speaking for' the interests of all US taxpayers), are two very different things.

Hurricane Katrina was an indiscriminate attack against a civilian population.

No, it wasn't. An attack of any kind.

Israel on the other hand has been attacking Hezbollah and infrastructure that supports Hezbollah.

Sure, one assumes that that is what they hope to destroy when they attack, it if it wasn't, the civilians killed would have been the target of deliberate attacks, rather than the victims of indiscriminate violence.

sportie,

Wow. You have really gone off the deep end.

Grab hold of my hand tightly, now, and I'll lead you through this morass of facts:

1. I said (in part), "Hezbollah has killed more Israeli soldiers than Israeli citizens."

2. Sportie quoted, "A total of 33 Israeli soldiers have died in the fighting and 19 civilians" killed by Hez.

3. Sportie also quotes that 20 people were wounded by Hez.

(2) agrees with (1). (3) is irrelevent wrt (1).

Now, sportie, I suggest next time the nurse stops by you request tht she *decrease* your meds.

In any case, stop wasting all of our time.

I don't know that that's "the" definition; American Heritage says...

Our friend Red State Mike defined terrorism as something to the effect of an attack intended to produce terror and fear in a civilian population.

He has been so far unsuccessful in explaining how his own definition does not apply to Shock and Awe.

cmdicely,

Indiscriminate means random. Using it you intentionally imply they are shooting fish in a barrel in a general expectation of killing something.

ex-liberal blathers:

It's another to see a body bleeding in the street, perhaps with limbs missing and other signs of violence. I certainly don't think you'd bring your young child to view such a horrible sight.

The child was in a grave, you ridiculous moron. Your reading comprehension is as bad as sportie's.

Time to get rid of these people with dual loyalties.

Deport Jewish neocons to Israel if they don't go voluntarily.

Papists and Holy Rollers who want to combine church and state, send 'em to ...?

Hispanic racists who support the invasion should be deported to Latin America with the illegals, along with the Grand Coyote, the King of Spenders, Jorge Bush. And Jose McCain for good measure.

Let's clean up America.

On the one hand, Jews should support Bush because he's strongly pro-Israel. On the other hand, if I'm a Jew, many of Bush's most fervent supporters -- and possibly even Bush himself -- think I'm going to hell for my beliefs.

It's quite the dilemma.

No one has suggested otherwise nor has anyone said jews can't disagree with Israel.

That is exactly what Charon is suggesting.

I meant "unconventionAL" in that definition, of course. No reputable political scientist would use the term "terrorism" to describe STATE action.

Certainly, none would ever use "terrorism" to describe, for example, the actions or "terrorist" to describe the actors in the "state action" under the regime governing France in 1794, or point to that state action as the pivotal point in the modern development of terrorism. Or point to state terrorism directed at the regimes own people under the early Bolshevik regime as an important major step in the development of modern terrorism.

Whatever.

disputo wrote:
1. I said (in part), "Hezbollah has killed more Israeli soldiers than Israeli citizens."

2. Sportie quoted, "A total of 33 Israeli soldiers have died in the fighting and 19 civilians" killed by Hez.

I see, as long as more soldiers have been killed, civilian deaths are A-OK. 100 soldiers killed, 99 civilians killed, OK by disputo! Well, at least we know where you stand.

You are trying to paint Israel as the "evil civilian killers", and Hezbollah as the "innocent freedom fighters". Of course, you are as full of sh!t as a Christmas turkey. But we already knew that.

cmd,

Can't be true. I saw a guy on the History Channel argue that the Palestinians invented terrorism....

Indiscriminate means random.

While that's one rough synonym, the relevant definition is more "not making or based on careful distinctions" than simply "random".

Yeah, "ex-liberal," it's the Arabs' own fault they get pissed off when Israelis kill their kids. They're so declasse for not cooperating with the Israelis in covering up their handiwork.

Gregory, your sarcasm is actually correct. Let's compare Palestinians to other countries. Lots of Israelis have bere killed by terrorist, but you didn't see photos of mutilated bodies surrounded by Israeli children. After the Bali bombing, you didn't see mutilated bodies surrounded by Indonesian children. Similarly, after the attacks in London and Madrid, you didn't see bloody corpses surrounded by British or Spanish children.

Even other middle eastern countries don't behave this way. There's been awful carnage in Iraq, but the Iraqis don't bring their children to pose around the mangled corpses. Nor do the Lebanese, the Kuwaitis, the Saudi Arabians, etc.

The Palestinians are unusual in the way they brutalize their children and train them in hatred. That may be why Arab countries don't want Palestinian immigrants.

Ex-liberal, the original item said "They were in a circle observing a little 3 yr old girl, killed by Israeli fire, lying in a still open grave." I'm not sure about culture, but where I come from "grave" implies the site chosen as a final resting place for the dead, not the place where somebody died, as your argument seems to be implying. Viewing the dead in the grave at a funeral is not the same as strolling around the neighborhood viewing the damage of warfare. With that distinction made, though, I don't think either is inappropriate. If you live in an area where people indiscriminately drop bombs that kill 3-year old children, it's probably a good idea to learn young that such things happen and to know who the people responsible are.

sportie tries to cover up his own illiteracy by proffering the following strawman:

I see, as long as more soldiers have been killed, civilian deaths are A-OK. 100 soldiers killed, 99 civilians killed, OK by disputo! Well, at least we know where you stand.

Of course, I never said or implied that.

You are trying to paint Israel as the "evil civilian killers", and Hezbollah as the "innocent freedom fighters". Of course, you are as full of sh!t as a Christmas turkey. But we already knew that.

Again, never said nor implied that. In fact, I have repeatedly referred to Hez's attacks on civs as war crimes. As are Israel's.

Really, sportie, it is time that you and your filthy mouth just left this site.

disputo wrote:
The child was in a grave, you ridiculous moron. Your reading comprehension is as bad as sportie's.

excerpt from article:
"...lying in a still open grave...

Tool.

Really, sportie, it is time that you and your filthy mouth just left this site.

Sorry disputo, I understand how frightened and insecure you must feel to have an opposing point of view around.

sportie, my dim-witted, foul-mouthed, illiterate friend, ex-lib asserted that the child's body was laying in the street when it was viewed.

Ex lib, I am glad you are an ex lib. Would not want you on my side of the isle, no how, no way.

it's one thing to view a body in a casket after it has been fixed up by the mortician. It's another to see a body bleeding in the street, perhaps with limbs missing and other signs of violence. I certainly don't think you'd bring your young child to view such a horrible sight.

Death rituals are among the most intensively culturally proscribed of all human behaviors. I am astonished that you can be so pompous as to castigate members of a tribal based society half a world away for not following your tight-assed and chauvinistic view of how a neighborhood should bury on of its children killed in one of the most horrific of ways imaginable.

As the great philosopher Bugs would say, “What a maroon!”

Sorry disputo, I understand how frightened and insecure you must feel to have an opposing point of view around.

Yes, sportie, your view that Christian and Muslim Arabs are not human beings on par with Jewish Israelis indeed opposes my view, but it hardly frights me. I've been fighting against racists like you since before you were born.

Hannah Arendt said totalitarianism is based on creating a society of continuous terror. The Nazi death camps and Stalin's darkness at noon were used as examples of this type of terror. Recently the word terror has been used to describe what some political actors without state backing do when they blow up civilian targets to make political statements or inflict a bit of harm on their overwhelmingly armed opponents. When I look at how the Palestinians have been treated by the state of Israel, I see many aspects of the type of totalitarian terror society Ms. Arendt wrote about. When I see the type of terror 'terrorists' create I see many aspects of the political calculation used by political actors to bring attention to their cause. The creation of political terrorism of the second half of the Twentieth Century is often attibuted to the leadership of the Irgun, which, interestingly enough, many of whom became the leadership of the political party Likud. In the last twenty years the escalation of poor treatment of Palestinians in the occupied territories has reminded me of totalitarian terror and seemed to occur with the rising poitical fortunes of Likud. The breaking of the right hands of all Palestinian men and boys arrested during the first Intifada comes to mind, as well as the redundant checkpoints and restricitons on movement that aslo came about during this time.

Al Queda is something different than the political terrorists like Irgun and the PLO, I think. Al Queda is much more a non-state/non-nationalist organization like that depicted in James Bond movies motivated by an ideology, and is why trying to solve the problem they have created with conventional military tactics has failed.

The terror created by nationalists should be recognized as producing something different than state sponsored terror societies. One is trying to bring recognition to its cause and creating some pain against its opponent and the other seeks to bring pain and suffering through systemic acts to an entire population in order to make them disappear or conform to a rigid ideology.

Hostile's comment above reminded me that America was born with the help terrorist activities.

Tax collectors were tarred and feathered. The homes and businesses of loyalsts were destroyed. It all depends on whose ox is being gored and who writes the history.

Sorry disputo, I understand how frightened and insecure you must feel to have an opposing point of view around.

No, it's just boring and tiresome to have yet another predictably dishonest point of view around.

The irony is Israel would be far better served by a US that could act as a fair and trusted broker than one that is unconditionally supportive.

Once more for all of you in the terrorist bad/freedom fighter good crowd, terrorism is the weapon of those who can’t afford large numbers of F-15’s or tanks. Back in the 40’s, before they had F-15’s and tanks, the Zionists used terror extensively as a weapon. Look up Menachem Begin and the Irgun.

The concept that it is in Israel’s interest to live in a stable more moderate neighborhood just doesn’t seem to get much traction. Actions ranging from the assassinations of moderate west bank Arab mayors following the 6 Day War up to the present destabilization of the Lebanese government suggest a new definition for chutzpa: when a country destroys its moderate neighbors, and then announces it deserves sympathy in the court of world opinion on the grounds it is surrounded by radicals.

Israel on the other hand has been attacking Hezbollah and infrastructure that supports Hezbollah.

...and the political and civil infrasturcture of Lebanon, and civilian cars containing families fleeing the fighting, and ambulances, and...

cld, your dishonesty is really getting boring. Could you try to make your defense of Israel's behavior resemble the facts on (or, more accurately, in) the ground?

Given the current Republican animus about illegal immigrants, they would do well to soft-pedal dual loyalty as a concept.

There are a lot more Mexican Americans than Jewish Americans, after all.

Al Queda is something different than the political terrorists like Irgun and the PLO, I think. Al Queda is much more a non-state/non-nationalist organization like that depicted in James Bond movies motivated by an ideology, and is why trying to solve the problem they have created with conventional military tactics has failed.

Exactly. al-Qaeda (and Hezbollah, and lots of other groups) are non-state actors trying to gather the power to become states or (as in Hezbollah's case) take power in existing states. A state only exists, after all, to the extent that people subject to it treat it as legitimate, either from genuine attachment or fear of the consequences of not doing so (either consequences from the "state" itself or from an external threat.)

The ultimate target of their terrorism—the population sought principally to be terrorized—is not their "enemies" (Israel, the US, etc.) but the population that they pretend to serve and seek to mobilize. And there are two kinds of fear they seek to impose there: fear that suppresses dissent within the population because of what happens to dissenters, and fear of an external enemy that leads people to see defending the polity the organization seeks to lead as essential to the security and welfare of themselves and their kin.

Gregory, ...and the political and civil infrasturcture of Lebanon, and civilian cars containing families fleeing the fighting, and ambulances, and...

You know those cars were the target and not the highway underneath?

You've never once posted a thought that had anything to do with anything outside your imagination.

It's remarkably like you're having some kind of religious experience.

You know those cars were the target and not the highway underneath?

LMAO. Classic.

I propose that this be awarded the first "Straw Grasping Award", which shall be named after its recipient.

Stay tuned to see who wins tomorrow's CLD SGA.

"Conservatives should take care not to let their own agitprop come back to bite them."

Based on recent history, the likelihood of this occurring seems to be in inverse proportion to the significance of the issue-- viz., the impeachment prosecution of President Clinton.

In Disputo's world,

A highway has never been used as a supply route.

cld retorted:

In Disputo's world, A highway has never been used as a supply route.

The first daily winner of the SGA *and* the Strawman Award! Congrats!

Disputo,

A strawman argument is something demonstrably false stuck into a dispute and falsely attributed to the view of your opponent, meant only to distract because it can be easily refuted.

This is what you have done in trying to lead the gullible into believing a highway is not a military target.

sportsfan79: You are trying to paint Israel as the "evil civilian killers", and Hezbollah as the "innocent freedom fighters".

For the record:

• Israeli military fatalities: 33 (source: IDF)
• Israeli civilian fatalities: 19 (source: IDF)
• Hezbollah fatalities: 27 (source: Hezbollah) to "at least 200" (source: IDF)
• Lebanese civilian fatalities: 382 confirmed to "as many as 600" (sources: Lebanon Ministry of Health)

Your ridiculous strawman notwithstanding, skepticism is warranted both about the way the Israeli military campaign is curently being conducted, and what it can ultimately achieve.

has407,

What alternative model for such an action can you think of think of, where a military has to fight into a heavily populated small area in a conflict with an embedded organization?

In about two and a half weeks there have been around 600 dead. Contrasted with what similar circumstance? A hundred a day died in Iraq last month, but I don't think that circumstance is similar.

cld: What alternative model for such an action can you think of think of, where a military has to fight into a heavily populated small area in a conflict with an embedded organization?

Boots on the ground. That is where the IDF appears to be headed with the recent callup--although not yet fully committed, at least if press releases are to be believed. And no suprise that there is some concern that the current Chief of Staff comes from the IAF, with the implied reliance on airpower. Whether those concerns are justified or not, the fact is that there does appear to be a reliance on airpower, which has increased collateral damage, and which appears to have done little to reduce Hezbollah's capabilities.

That said, boots on the ground bring a whole new set of issues, and not necessarily a solution. As Shaul Mofaz (Transportation Minister and former Defense Minister) stated, "Let us assume that you get to the Litani, and they continue to fire against Haifa... What have you achieved?" Good question. A question that should have been considered before opening this can of worms with 500lb bombs instead of a knife.

Agreed, that some force on the ground is the only stabilizing solution, and, probably, NATO is the only force that has any realistic hope.

But, I think if the IDF put in a huge part of its own personel it would lead to street-by-street fighting until nothing was left standing.

There is something sick, horrifying ind inhumane about a war that leaves more children dead and maimed than armed combatants.

The ultimate target of their terrorism—the population sought principally to be terrorized—is not their "enemies" (Israel, the US, etc.) but the population that they pretend to serve and seek to mobilize.

There isn't anything remotely new here. There's no difference between Stalin and Osama except Stalin was far more successful. Terrorist leaders are mass murderers in the tradition of Stalin, Hitler, Castro, etc., except they haven't been successful enough to get control of a 'real' state. In the Hezbollah case they are no much more than a mercenary army used by Iran to further goals it cannot possibly meet as a state.

Israel would crush Iran and Syria at the same time. They can use Hezbollah as their attacking army and the UN as their defense. Israel is merely one front in the GWOT which is a war against radical Islam. They won't win in Israel and they won't win in North America and they won't win in Asia. They do have a solid shot in Europe

No one has suggested otherwise nor has anyone said jews can't disagree with Israel.

That is exactly what Charon is suggesting.

That is not what Mona said. Jews CAN disagree with Israel. It's their right, here and in Israel. Mona is saying they're stupid in doing so. There's a big difference.

In fact the politics here are pretty interesting. The GOP clearly sent Boltons nomination back up to the Senate to force a vote they are likely to lose. Rove wants the Democrats to vote against the guy who's been the single most aggressive supporter for Israel in the UN.

Hillary faces a dilemma and she will face many more before she faces the voters in November of 2008 as the Democratic nominee. She will vote against Bolton and it will be a factor among jewish voters. She'll still carry NY easily but it will not help in Florida or PA and several other states.

This is why it's so rare for Senators to move to the White House. This is just one vote scheduled for the primary purpose of getting Democrats to alienate voters. The Governors get off easy. Senators have to explain votes.

Kevin said: George Bush is indisputably the most pro-Israel president in the history of the United States.

If you really want to understand Bush you need to know this - Bush is a dual loyalty type:

George W Bush is a Jew (who pretends to be a Christian)!

This partly explains the weirdness of the man and why he never acts like a Christian.

Here, have a look at him praying at the Wailing Wall.

He could be praying to Allah, but it doesn't look like it. And what is that funny cap thing on his head?

Yes, Bush is a Jew, he has Jews all through his family tree.

For example, Levi Pierce and his mother Barbara Pierce (Levi and Barbara are related) are both Jews.

Pierce is an Americanization of the Jewish name Perez/Peretz/Peres. The name is of Hebrew origin. According to Genesis 38, Pharez (the spelling Perez is also used (in the First Book of Chronicles)) was a son of Judah born to Tamar (who incidentally, was Judah's daughter in law (Judah, the father of the Jews, was a dirty old man)).

In case you are interested Levi and Barbara Pierce are related as follows:

Thomas Holbrook (d. 1677) m. Jane Powys
.John Holbrook m. Elizabeth Stream
|.Hannah Holbrook m. Ephraim Pierce
| .Ephraim Pierce m. Mary Low
|  .Mial Pierce m. Judith Round
|   .Nathan Pierce m. Lydia Martin
|    .Isaac Pierce m. Anna Fitch
|     .LEVI PIERCE m. Betsey Slade Wheeler
|      .Elizabeth Slade Pierce m. Courtland Philip Livingston Butler
|       .Mary Elizabeth Butler m. Robert Emmet Sheldon
|        .Flora Sheldon m. Samuel Prescott Bush
|         .Prescott Sheldon Bush m. Dorothy Walker
|          .GEORGE HERBERT WALKER BUSH m. Barbara Pierce
|           .GEORGE W. BUSH, US President
.Thomas Holbrook m. Jane Kingman
 .Peter Holbrook m. Alice Godfrey
  .Sylvanus Holbrook m. Naomi Cook
   .John Holbrook m. Zilpah Thayer
    .John Holbrook m. Rhoda Thayer
     .John Holbrook m. Mercy Hill
      .Chloe Holbrook m. James Pierce
       .Jonas James Pierce m. Kate Pritzel
        .Scott Pierce m. Mabel Marvin
         .Marvin Pierce m. Pauline Robinson
          .BARBARA PIERCE

Doesn't that mean BUSH's mother is his cousin? Always thought Bush was inbred.

In the 2004 US election you got to choose between the Jew Kerry and the Jew Bush.

Some choice,... like the choice between the front side of a piece of paper, or the back side.

So the result of the election has already been decided before you get to "choose".

I would rather have the Iranian type of election.

And here's a couple of snaps of Bush's grandaddy,.. sure looks Jewish to me:

Prescott Sheldon Bush with Ike.
Prescott Sheldon Bush with Nixon.

Assorted shots of Bush with Rabbis:

Bush visiting the St. Petersburg synagogue on a rushed trip to Russia.
Another shot from the St. Petersburg synagogue visit.
Jeb Bush celebrates Chanukah with assorted Rabbis.

On the one hand, Jews should support Bush because he's strongly pro-Israel. On the other hand, if I'm a Jew, many of Bush's most fervent supporters -- and possibly even Bush himself -- think I'm going to hell for my beliefs.

That's not true about Bush and it's beside the point. Mona is saying Jews invested in Israel should vote for bush because no President has ever been more supportive of Israel. There's no reason for jews to be even remotely concerned about GWBs religion or what he things will happen to them in the adfterlife. If they had a shred of concern his opinion might be accurate they wouldn't be jews in the 1st place. They already have their own beliefs. This is about the future of the Jewish state and what is best for that state. Logically Mona has a point. Except for two things. It assumes jews are single issue voters and they're not and it assumes all jews agree with the current direction of israel and they don't.

To the extent they disagree with Israels government they should vote against GWB. To the extent Abortion rights or the minimum wage are more important they should vote agasint GWB.

Th fact is Bush and Rove have been effective in identifying groups that have been historically solidly blue or independent by habit but have more in common with conservatives and convincing them of that fact. GWB has improved the GOP take with Hispanic voters and jewish voters, especially younger jewish voters.

Rove doesn't need to double the jewish vote but 10% here and there matters especially if it compounds. He can make Florida a solid red state (if he had decent senate candidates).

Almost sorry that my ISP at this house is working now that I see wtcher is back vilifying me and the rest of Gods chosen people.

Schmuck.

American Jews do not have dual-loyalty - their only loyalty is to Israel. Well Israel and Bilderberg Group.
And I guess Woody Allen too. Okay American Jews only loyalty is to Israel, the Bilderberg Group, Woody Allen, wholesale prices, the false god Yaweh and the local chinese take-out. Didn't you see the photos of the pro-Israel rally with all the American Jews waving the Israeli flag? Just like those damn Mexicans at those immigration riots. The Jews want to cross the border and take our jobs. First they invade Lebanon and then their in Scottsdale hanging out at the Home Depot. Every right thinking loyal American knows that if you own the flag of any other nation then you are a traitor. The only exception is the glorious emblem of the CSA but since that counrty only exists in hopes and memories it doesn't really count.

You have all this evidence of loyalty to Israel and yet none dare call it treason.
John Birch

ps - Catholics are only loyal to the Vatican and pray to photos of the current pope (anti-christ) and JFK.

Being Jewish means a lot more than blindly supporting Israel. It means supporting the party which does the most to promote and support Jewish values, such as tolerance and helping the poor, and that is the Democratic Party.

Do not assume that all American Jews support the government of Israel. After all, barely half the Jews in Israel support it!

oldgreenguy wrote: Funny, we were having a discussion in my family last weekend about open coffin funerals and how it was even customary when my mother was growing up to have the body displayed on the dining room table. Of course, hers was a family of Catholics, probably just a half step removed from muslims in the eyes of people like ex-liberal. Disputo makes a similar point

Good try, guys, but there's a difference. it's one thing to view a body in a casket after it has been fixed up by the mortician. It's another to see a body bleeding in the street, perhaps with limbs missing and other signs of violence. I certainly don't think you'd brin

Is Mona Charen still around? I'd thought she's gone the mommy route, or gone into consulting.

I think Kevin should start a feature where he highlights stupid election strategies by desperate Republicans: "Latest Craven Republican Machinations" or something along that line.

Back in the 40’s, before they had F-15’s and tanks, the Zionists used terror extensively as a weapon. Look up Menachem Begin and the Irgun.

And then look up the "saison" and the "Altalena", to find out what the founders of Israel thought of the terror groups.

I don't like politics, especially Bush's politics. But I like:
Animal Picture ,Nature Picture ,Animal picture ,Puma Shoes Store ,Alpha Lipoic Acid ,New Balance Shoes ,Mediterranean cruise ,Vitamin C ,Nutritional Supplements.

Great job http://snow.utoronto.ca/cgi/wbbb/gen_forum/config.pl?read=37424 snowutoron20

American Jews can take offense as much as they want, and there are plenty who have a right to be offended, if the claim is based solely on the fact that they are American Jews and nothing more.

But it is abundantly clear that there are American Jews, like Lieberman, who do have a dual loyalty and who often do place Israeli interests above American interests.