I am in fact arguing that calling Israel a "murderous apartheid state" is anti-semitic. When someone goes into such tirades without any context, without any specific examples or qualification, it is to my mind the same irrational Jew hatred as one could encounter from traditional anti-semites. The article I cited proposes that the new, Kosher antisemitism hides behind anti-Zionism. I don't accept this idea that you can love the people of Israel but criticize the policy of Israel when that criticism is so over the top, so irrational, so non-specific in its hatred of the country, that it cannot plausibly be accepted as valid. It is the new anti-semitism.

I'm glad you're pro-German and anti-Nazi, but I don't see how any of that applies to what I wrote. The article I cited is only tangentially relevant to Germany, because it talks of a lawsuit of a German woman against those who called her an anti-semite.

It's kind of hard to end occupation when the supposedly liberated people keep throwing rockets at you. Yeah, I'm talking about Gaza and Hamas. I believe Olmert wanted to end occupation in the West Bank, but it is kind of a hard sell to Israeli public when they see what happens to Sderot. I believe (call me naive if you want) that the majority of Israel does want to end occupation. It is kind of impossible right now, when the void is immediately filled with Palestinians extremists. Are you proposing that Israel has to negotiate with Hamas? See, it is easy to lean on Israel, but I have never seen anyone proposing a plan of how to apply pressure on Hamas and make it accept Israeli right to exist. BTW, do you at least accept Israeli right to exist?

You can characterize occupation as murderous, if you want, although even that I think betrays a very strong bias. However, when someone is calling the whole state (not the occupation!) as murderous and apartheid, I am arguing that it is non-specific and irrational hatred. Further, when someone does it in the context of talking of Jewish neo-cons and the Jewish lobby that supposedly has such a huge influence on American politics, I think it further strengthens suspicion that such person is anti-semitic. However, my main point was this: it used to be that anti-semites were talking of global Jewish domination of the world. The new anti-semites hide behind anti-Zionism and talk of the all-powerful Jewish lobby in the US. Again, here's the link to the article:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1218710366461&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

I think Cary's answer is brilliant, but I would add that LW has to get rid of her therapist, who is only echoing her thoughts of 'drawing the line.' This is very convenient for the therapist, not to be confrontational, but the end result would be tragic. LW, there is no line for your husband to cross, because he has to grow it himself first. You had a real line, in the form of the babies. Your ultimatums are worthless, because they are completely artificially constructed.

Really, get rid of your therapist. And let your husband work with his.

Hamas was never democratically elected to rule Gaza.

Here's what they were democratically elected for: the gained majority in PLO parliament. As such, they were entitled to form the government of West Bank and Gaza. After that, Israel and the Quartet demanded that they recognize Israel, which they refused. As a compromise, Abbas, the Palestinian president, replaced Hamas's government with a "technocratic" government, in order to continue to get Western aid. The next step was Hamas seizing power in Gaza, occupying all the PLO government structures, and killing scores of Fatah members. They are now de facto government of Gaza. They were NEVER elected to be rulers of Gaza. They've refused to shower power with Fatah and Egyptian attempts to mediate a "reconciliation" between Fatah and Hamas failed.

Also, for some it may also be news that Israel is not the only neighbor of Gaza, and Israel does not actually control all its borders. The other country is of course Egypt. Like Israel, Egypt is also refusing to open its border to Gaza or establish relations with Hamas. They only want to deal with Palestinian Authority, which is Abbas in West Bank.

I don't quite understand your point. Why are you giving me links about circumstances of how America wanted to overthrow Hamas or who was at fault in the Hamas - Fatah coup in Gaza. Did I mention any of that? No. I'm plainly stating the facts:

1) Hamas was only democratically elected in the sense that they gained majority in parliamentary elections of Palestinian Authority.

2) Hamas has illegally usurped power in Gaza. They have stepped outside any "democratic" process. You can argue if they're right or if Fatah is right or if it's all Israel's fault or America's fault. That's besides my point. I'm only trying to establish that you simply cannot use "democratically elected" of the 1) in the current situation.

I also don't understand why you bring up the fact that Egypt receives billions in aid. I'm sure it's all clear in your head, but what you write does not really correlate with what I wrote.

To LondonLad: I don't think it was too much to ask that Hamas, having formed its government, before their coup in Gaza, accept the obligations of past PA governments, including recognizing Israel's right to exist, if they wanted to continue to receive Western aid. Other arab states can, of course, continue not to recognize Israel's right to exist. But they don't rely on Western aid like Palestinian Authority does.