when you hear that someone went on a shooting rampage in Seattle and Mel Gibson blames the Jews for the world's problems
when he's arrested for drunk driving.  

Almost six thousand years and some things just don't change.

shooting spree? How come that is not on the news? It is also news to me that Mel is 6000 years old.

Re:It's not easy being God's chosen......Thanks God for all you do for world peace...

I think that Israel has made a huge blunder with its incursion/invasion into Lebanon.

Mimicking the United States' invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq (i.e., another one of George W.'s 'catastrophic successes') is no way for Israel to run a foreign policy.

I hardly think the above views are 'anti-semitic', just as judging George W.'s foreign policy 'initiatives' (i.e., preemptive wars) as failures doesn't make me 'un-American'.

-- Modified on 7/29/2006 11:03:06 AM

The entire western world has mollycoddled the State of Israel since it's inception and all we have gotten for it is insanely high petroleum costs and more divisiveness and bloodshed.

Enough with the "you're an anti-Semite" if ya' don't sympathize with us bullsh*t. Ya' own Hollywood, the banks and the jewelry industry. Now it's OUR fault the Gaza strip isn't the worlds biggest oil reserve.

 I personally believe ALL organized religions are at least half full of shit. When it comes to whining and martyrdom though..........      

Re:It's not easy being God's chosen......Thanks God for all you do for world peace...

NOSC, you're falling for the oldest trick in the Zionist political playbook -- accusing  opponents of anti-Semetism any and every time an opinion not favorable to Israel is voiced. This is as consistent and predictable  as the sunrise or the laws of gravity.

This does two things [1] it allows the pro-Israel side to evade any discussion of the merits of the case [and, of, we know Israel IS NEVER, EVER WRONG, so I'm curious why the pro-Israel forces would not want to debate on the merits of the case ; [2] it puts you on the defensive, forcing you to defend yourself against charges with no basis in reality.  

50 years ago a practice very similar to this was a key element of the political phenomena we know as "McCarthyism."

Anyway, it's interesting how this works.  The pro-Israel side seems to have implicitly set up a little syllogism :

1. Israel is the collective/corporate expression of the Jewish people,
2. criticism of Israel is in reality criticism of the Jewish people as a whole,
3. that is an example of anti-Semitism,
4. therefore, criticism of Israel is anti-Semetic.

See, you just can't win, so it's better not to try to argue this point [your lack of anti-semetic attitudes], as it's a losing proposition.

Former Harvard President Lawrence Summers was an unabashed proponent of this view, and though his practice of borderline Mccarthyism was NOT the official reason for his resignation as Harvard President earlier this year I shed absolutely no tears for the chunky prevaricator.

And I certainly enjoyed the not-remarked upon irony, just a Summers knowingly twists and distorts the words and meanings of many opponents of Israel, so in turn his relatively bland and off-the-cuff remarks re the career paths of female scientists compared to those of their male counterparts were twisted and distorted, to Summers' ultimate disadvantage.

Payback is such a bitch, and turnabout is such fair play.  Could this have happened to a nicer or more deserving guy?

I believe one of the greatest atrocities commited against people is the suffering experienced by Native Americans as a result of being driven from their homeland.

in 2006, would you rather be a Native American, with full citizenship rights in the USA [admittedly, the country which screwed your forebearers into near extinction], or a Pally under the less-than-benign and disinterested control/jurisdiction/occupation of the Israelis?

Say what you want, the Bureau of Indian Affairs doesn't conhduct commando raids, artillery barrages, or airstrikes against Native American reservation AFAIK.

19th century USA to 20th century Palestine, especially with respect to these points:

(1)  New settlers arrived in a geographic region.  Conflict arose between the settlers and the indigenous peoples.  The settlers prove to be more proficient in the use of weapons and social systems, and soon the indigenous peoples are confined to restricted areas.

(2) Compare and contrast the treatment of these peoples at the hands of the named person or people:

Native Americans by US government
Jews by Nazis
Cambodians by Khmer Rouge
Mexican tribes by Aztecs
Mexican tribes by Spanish
Many Soviet groups by Stalin
Arabs by Israelis
Any others you may choose

sucking dick!

taking this idea and running with it to the point of rationalizing bigtime wars - somehow this concept does seem to have eluded the Asian folk.   Maybe they kill just for the sheer pure hell of it.