A substantive response by the ADL would dispel any misconceptions, one would think. That would be a good idea, rather than outrage and obfuscation.

But this is -- or was -- clearly a fringe position, easily debunked by reviewing the Bronner article you cited in support of your claim, copy on Ahmadinejad's own web site, the similarity of the alternate translation -- "The regime currently occupying Jerusalem must be wiped from the pages of time" -- and making a simple appeal to common sense.

I have no idea what your point is.

Because of Glenn simply asking Mr. Foxman to explain himself, it seems that Mr.Foxman has found himself in position that the lyrics to your call name rather vividly describe.

Mr. Foxman seems to have caught himself up in a quandary due to his refusal or inability to tell the truth.

The wheel is turning and you can't slow down,
You can't let go and you can't hold on,
You can't go back and you can't stand still,
If the thunder don't get you then the lightning will.

"...Adding to the dissonance..."

(it) "...is impossible to track and respond to every incident...", quoted by Abraham Foxman--head ADL dude...

...yep--tough to track...

...even when 4 billion dollar company that broadcasts to hundreds of millions of television sets does it...

...yep...tough to pardon out THAT from the dissonance...

...could somebody get Abe a Q-tip, so he can hear a little better...

...Another question:

Just how loud does Fox have to go to cross this tenuous 'dissonance' threshhold, so Honest Abe rest easy in his ethics before having a go at those bad bad men???

...stunning intellectual dishonesty right there for everyone to see...yuk

In your last "Various Items" post, you touched on the topic of war with Iran, making the claim that Ahmadinejad's call that "Israel should be wiped off the map" was actually a "manipulative [mis-translation] [sic] by neoconservatives". But this is -- or was -- clearly a fringe position, easily debunked by reviewing the Bronner article you cited in support of your claim, copy on Ahmadinejad's own web site, the similarity of the alternate translation -- "The regime currently occupying Jerusalem must be wiped from the pages of time" -- and making a simple appeal to common sense.

Compare and contrast:

• The United States should be wiped off the map.
• The regime currently occupying Washington must be wiped from the pages of time.

Do you begin to see the difference yet?

I didn't think so.

I have no idea what your point is.

As far as I can tell - other than being argumentative for argument's sake - Mr. Pagano aims to assert that there is no difference between regime change and genocide.

Which means he thinks George W. Bush is a war criminal.

I respect the right of the Francophile, blame-America-first, Deeply Unserious Mr. Pagano to hold whatever belief he wishes, even in a time of War...

The overall situation regarding the nexus of Israel, Neocons and the Religious Right is this:

1) The very existence of Israel is threatened by the possibility of nuclear weapons in the hands of jihadists. One or two nuclear weapons could completely obliterate the Jewish state. But would jihadists with suicase bombs sacrifice the Palestinians in order to destroy Israel? Possibly, although it doesn't seem likely.

2) American Neocons, primarily Jewish and liberal on other social and foreign policy issues, are committed to protecting Israel against all potential existential threats. Hence, Iraq was destroyed and now Iran is in their gunsights. Neocon policies support their misperceived Israeli interests at the expense of US interests, and as in the case of ADL's Foxman, make for some mighty strange bedfellows.

3) Once Iran has been reduced to ruin, Pakistan and then Syria and Saudi Arabia will have to be "dealt with." The Israeli tail is wagging the American dog into unprovoked wars not seen since WWII.

4) The American Rapture Right (aka Christian Zionists) will support all this because Israel must exist in order for their biblical prophesies to be fulfilled and for Jesus to return. All other considerations are immaterial to them.

It is a great historic irony that the concentration of a large Jewish population in Israel -- meant to be a homeland and safe haven after the Holocaust -- has become an even greater danger of genocide in the era of nuclear weapons.

One has to wonder what Israel's security situation would be like today if the Irgunists had not ultimately triumphed over the Haganah and their policy of "restraint."

Glenn, thanks much for all your efforts.

Personally, I think the ADL's position on this kind of thing is really going to open the door to a lot of hatred and vitriol once this Iran thing gos down. Idiots like these actually increase the amount of anti-semitism in this country. They sure as hell don't decrease it.

Over the long run, I worry about the continued existence of Israel because of these cretins.

It is precisely because of ADL's role in preventing trivilaization of Holocaust for political gain, precisely because of your personal experience with Nazism, that we wonder why you have failed to condemn the "deeply offensive and equally repugnant" comments from the right.

Keep it up Glenn. You've got them dead to rights.

Either you're channeling Mark Elf or you need to get help. 75% or more of your recent output is violently antizionist/antisemitic. It's no longer the label it's the sheer quantity.

I agree that the moveon accusations were ridiculous, and I've been agreeing with GG's posts and the ADL's clear refusal to answer his questions directly. But in the spirit of making up my own mind on the question of ADL political bias, I went to their website to see whether I could discern a systematic neocon bias in their press releases, since the press releases seem like the most public "action" that the ADL takes.

From here http://www.adl.org/PresRele/Breaking_News.htm you can find the recent ones, and at the bottom of the page they have them broken down into categories. So I went and looked at some categories, mainly focussing on domestic ones, since internationally, they seem to spend most of their time defending Israel (and, recently, attacking Iran). Strictly in terms of media figures, I could see recent attacks on Mel Gibson, Glenn Beck, Don Imus, MoveOn, and a recent WFNY shock-jock routine. Four of these, of course, are right-wingers, and one a left-winger.

I then went and looked at what they have been up to in other domestic categories. I did find a recent attack on a Democratic congressman for making a reichstag/911 comparison. But click through to look at the rest of the releases in the discrimination (http://www.adl.org/PresRele/DiRaB_41/default.htm), civil rights (http://www.adl.org/PresRele/CvlRt_32/default.htm), or supreme court (http://www.adl.org/PresRele/SupremeCourt_33/default.htm) categories. Most of that stuff is standard, even heartening, leftist fare, although mainly sticking to issues of race and immigration. Their international stuff fits the neocon agenda, but domestically, they seem pretty good overall. Domestic-related terrorism issues are a interesting mix: in favor of increased anti-terrorism power, but also defending the rights of the Guantanamo prisoners.

None of this means they aren't biased towards Murdoch et al, just that no one entirely in the pocket of the right would take so many liberal stands over the last few years. I came into this with a definite anti-ADL bias, but now I'm interested in how they mix left and right. That doesn't change the fact that, according to their own principles, there's a lot more talk on the right that deserves their condemnation that, for whatever reason, they remain silent on; nor does it change the fact that, were figures on the left to use such language, the ADL might attack them without hesitation. But in terms of the ADL's overall reputation, domestically at least, they say a lot of good stuff. Basically, I guess, they should just drop the "inappropriate use of Nazi metaphor" category, since it seems way too easy to apply, and thus too easy to apply with bias.