Letters to the Editor
-
Can you offer just one example? How about mine?
"But when you discount the potential for anti-Semitic abuse, you are complicit."
But I never did of course, and you will not be able to cite one statement of mine suggesting that I've denied that anti-semites would criticize AIPAC for anti-semitic reasons.
You constructed that strawman because you still can't escape the implications of your argument. You cannot say when criticism of AIPAC would be legitimate, or offer any example of legitimate criticism of AIPAC. You also refuse to state whether my harsh criticism of AIPAC is legitimate or not. You appear completely unable to cite a single example, hypothetical or otherwise, of legitimate criticism of AIPAC that doesn't either traffic in anti-semitism or make one a fellow traveler.
You're pathetic.
-
Win Smith:
If I can respond to Glenn, my apologies if you feel slighted, but I never see you refer to your own Jewishness, so yes, I naturally assume it isn't a viable or active part of your life (or else, why not refer to it?).
I barely ever refer to anything about my individual attributes or private beliefs because I don't think that's what people come here to read. Has it ever occured to you that a person's religious views or lack thereor is a personal matter and really none of your business?
The fact that you think you have the right to go running around shouting that Person X does not hold certain religious views based exclusively on the fact that he has not announced those views is indicative of the kind of rank fallacies and increasing dishonesty that permeate almost everything you have written today.
Almost every one of your comments here today has been grounded in one of two practices, if not both: (1) inventing views and attributing them to people who don't hold those views and (2) making statements without having the slightest idea if they're true. That has led you into the numerous fallacies which Paul Rosenberg and others have identified.
-
Full circle
He simply should've listened as those well meaning Germans explained to him how German Jews had too much behind the scenes power, and it wasn't really anti-Semitism to point that out.
Back again to Glenn's point. If the left or a liberal even dares imply a criticism of anything related to Israel, we are comparable to Nazi's or Nazi defenders.
I understand. Well done.
-
Thomas c
thomas c said to WinS:
You're pathetic.
-- thomas c
I agree. On top of that, judging by his dismissive reply to me earlier, I don't think he has read Anne Franks diary. Someone going all day the way he has ought to have read Anne Frank's diary. It's no small thing.
-
How to attack AIPAC without being racist:
"Man, the wallpaper in the AIPAC building is ugly."
Carry on.
-
WinSmith can't seem to make himself clear
"I can only tell you that embedded within this question is the delegitimization of anti-Semitism itself. Because under your "I just want to criticize AIPAC" will scurry the true anti-Semites like David Duke." WinSmith
What's wrong with delegitimizing anti-semitism? I'm all in favor of delegitimizing anti-semitism. Why isn't WinSmith?
Frankly, WinsSmith, only a bigot would oppose the delegitimization of anti-semitism. Why don't you spead your hate elsewhere?
-
Back To Basics: WinSmith Is Anti-Greek
WinSmith:
Paul
Hey Paul Rosenberg, I hear if you repeat the word "fallacy" enough, it makes you sound smart.
Or was that a fallacy?
Or if we buy into Lacanian consumption of media via the psychoanalytic structuralist movement of the Frankfurt school, then wouldn't Benjamin, Adorno, Bourdieu and Kraceauer all agree that you're full of shit?
I think they would.
Logical fallacies have nothing whatever to do with the Frankfurt School specifically. (Nor, for that matter, were Lacan or Bourdieu part of the Frankfurt School.) They have to do with classic Greek rhetoric and logic.
In other words, as George Costanza would say, you've got nothing. Bupkis.
Which, of course, has been obvious all along.
-
Bebop
If yers let me hose ya's down with a water hose, ya's can stomp right on bye- And Smack me? I'll splash with you @ a o)hi-o;) swim hole.
On hot days like today I put the hose on mist and hang it where the orchids and I can share the coolness. My pond is small, not much room for two but I know of other o-HI-o swimmin' holes.
Thank someone for cultivating you.
I will pass your kind words along to my parents. And my Grandmother - she was the real cultivator in our family.
Pond muck between toes....
...is a Pond heaven sensation.
Yes! And goldfish nibbling tickles. And the sun on my back as I prune and tidy the plants. Lovely.
I am so far behind in the thread!
-
Thomas c
Dammit, T.C., you have the form of someone so intelligent without any of the content. But clearly there's a thinking mind somewhere in there, so I'll give it one last shot.
"But when you discount the potential for anti-Semitic abuse, you are complicit."
But I never did of course, and you will not be able to cite one statement of mine suggesting that I've denied that anti-semites would criticize AIPAC for anti-semitic reasons.
You constructed that strawman because you still can't escape the implications of your argument.
Firstly, I'm having about fifteen conversations, so try to expand your understanding of my responses. If you'd like to just talk one on one, I can be more consistent in directly addressing what you or another person said.
As to your response, the argument that charges of "anti-Semitism" are used to silence do exactly what you say "you" have never said. Fine, maybe you never said it. But the crux of this argument is that anyone who claims there is anti-Semitism at work in some of the AIPAC criticism is simply "stifling debate." Heck, go read FireDogLake. Read Glenn's argument. That's EXACTLY what they're stating.
My argument is this is more complex. Some, like Joementum, do invoke "anti-Semitism" to protect themselves from legit criticism. Others use AIPAC to fuel their grand Zionist conspiracy nonsense.
To legitimately criticize AIPAC you have to not only not inadvertently trip into standard anti-Jewish mythic fairytales of superpower (as we saw in this thread with claims that all politicians are owned by Israel and/or are fighting wars simply for Israel), but you have to be aware of the misuse of criticisms and, if possible, to explicitly clarify your criticism from those mythic power stories that have been so damaging for so long.
You claim you don't want to? Then you're part of the problem. Just like "some of my best friends are black people" has the best of intentions while perpetuating structural racism.
I've spelled everything out. You can disagree. But you can't keep whining that I'm not clear or lying about what I said (in your continued repetition that I'm saying no one can criticize AIPAC, the tedious straw man of straw men in this entire argument).
You cannot say when criticism of AIPAC would be legitimate, or offer any example of legitimate criticism of AIPAC.
Criticizing AIPAC for being wrong on the war. Criticizing AIPAC for lobbying for issues that are bad.
In other words, the same criticisms of any lobbying group. That's what AIPAC can and should be criticized for.
I hate AIPAC. I wouldn't give them money if you put a gun to my head.
But that has nothing to do with anything.
We're talking about those perpetuating the grand myth of hidden Jewish financial control of American government. Something many here claimed was a canard simply meant to silence them (it is not). Others claimed this type of grand myth is either true (it isn't), and that no one ever raises this myth. They do, see Duke, David and a bajillion Nazi websites like jewwatch.com:
http://www.jewwatch.com
Scroll down for "ZIONISM AND AIPAC"
You can find it just above "Jewish Supremacist Lists & The Associations They Dominate" and "Jewish Zionist Soviet Anti-American Spies".
But no matter. I'm sure this is all in my head. I'm just a paranoid.
You also refuse to state whether my harsh criticism of AIPAC is legitimate or not.
You're not the only one I'm responding to here, friend. Pardon me if I don't answer every question. If your ascribe AIPAC as the central hidden force behind America's decision to invade Iraq, then I will absolutely call you out for perpetuating a fiction popular with Anti-Semites. If you criticize AIPAC as a lobbying group wrong on Iraq, well of course. I'd agree with you 100%.
But they're just a lobbying group.
They're not proof positive of the hidden Israeli control of American government. That sort of nonsense is pure anti-Semitic canard, and the stuff of historical horror.
Not only should you be aware of this, it's imperative that you be aware of this. To ignore it or whine that you're being "silenced" is to be complicit.
You appear completely unable to cite a single example, hypothetical or otherwise, of legitimate criticism of AIPAC that doesn't either traffic in anti-semitism or make one a fellow traveler.
How's about a few links that do connect AIPAC conspiracy theories into the grand Zionist Financing Myth? Maybe I can open your eyes just a peep to the larger world you refuse to acknowledge:
How about "Jewish Lobby Stabbing America": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdsnDD-HNpk
Take Our World Back: http://www.takeourworldback.com/zionistcrimes.htm#nineeleven