And those Christians are the people I should align myself with for the sake of Zionism? Remeber too, WinSmith, the Goyim get Israel in the end. And without the Goyim, there would be no Israel.

Aren't you lucky WinSmith? America is your Shabbes Goy and so are the Goyim.

"those Christians" died centuries ago. Conflating historical events with people alive today is nonsense, DM, and you know it.

The Goyim didn't "get Israel in the end" whatever the hell that means. Palestine had hardly ever existed as a soverign state before 1948.

And it was a protectorate of Britain, numbnuts. And the State of Israel was formed by the entire United Nations. Here's President Truman on his deep love for Israel in 1948:

"I think the proper thing to do, and the thing I have been doing, is to do what I think is right and let them all go to hell."

Thank God for Israel's "Shabbas Goy," whatever the hell that means. Did you buy Judaism for Dummies or something, D.M? Drop the lingo, it's insulting.

Glenn, you got busted linking to a clip of violence not caused by Israelis from 2005, and this is your correction?

(UPDATE: there's good reason to believe it's not from an Israeli attack), but it's certainly reflective of the carnage in Gaza. It's much easier to undervalue the suffering imposed on The Other when you don't have to see it.

How is it "reflective of the carnage in Gaza" any more than a clip from people being killed in Bosnia in 1994? Why not admit in your zeal to show Israeli "atrocity" you bit before you should have?

It's going to be hard to take you seriously the next time you critique traditional media's mistakes, misquotes and mis-citations, and then their lack of refutation. If you're going to be a real journalist (and you are, as the recent Chicago Tribune shows), you need to live by the very expectations you have so rightly placed on traditional corporate media the last few years.

Glenn, I realize as a prosecutor you like to inscribe a self-narrative of dispassionate critical distance, but as anyone who reads you knows, just because you say it, doesn't make it true.

You are probably one of the most emotional bloggers to have achieved success, with nearly every post written as someone outraged by the abuses of our Constitution and our government by the crooks in the republican party, and by the complicity of the American media.

Unlike the actually dispassionate Josh Marshall and Matt Yglesias, your entire writing style is infused by emotional sway. You critique the motivations of those you write about using words like "craven," "base," "pathological" and numerous other discriptive words that are essential to emotive response.

At your best, you combine this with your lawyerly ability to make a factual case to make arguments that both touch the heart and convince the mind.

At your worst, you are in complete self denial, as you are about your now self-proclaimed "lack of emotion" about Israel either way. Give me a break, man. I'd need a team of psychiatrists to cut through this disconnect.