Leftist Editor takes charge of JPOST

50 Comments / 50 Comments

1. Dweller writes:
   It does take a rational mind, however.

   Dweller, Anyone who denies that there are Semites who are not Jews has a mind that is not only closed and irrational – but barely functioning.

   Your stubborn and willful ignorance is reaching new depths. Let’s see you make fun of these dictionaries:

   http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/semite?show=0&t=1314582360

   Definition of SEMITE
   1a : a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs b : a descendant of these peoples

   http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/Semite?region=us

   Semite: a member of any of the peoples who speak or spoke a Semitic language, including in particular the Jews and Arabs.

2. “…the learned scholar, Dweller, apparently had no idea that there were Semites who were not Jews.”

   That’s because there AREN’T.

   And one needn’t be learned OR a “scholar” to discover that.

   It does take a rational mind, however.

   And, alas, an open one.

3. Dweller writes:
   Ok, if you want that to be your definition of “constantly,” I continue to await your evidence that Yamit frequently fabricates.

   The evidence is in your own posts as well as all over the archives. Please don’t be lazy. Look it up.

   Cite the words that demonstrate his “bigotry.”

   Again, if you want quotes, look them up yourself. Don’t be so lazy. Feiglin attacked Glenn Beck’s crusade in support of Israel simply because Beck is a Christian then added some bullshit about Christ demeaning Jews by driving money changers out of the temple. Actually, Christ was respecting the sanctity of the temple, and it is Feiglin who is expressing his bigotry. That’s bigotry.

   I simply encouraged him to flesh out the story,

   Actually, his story did not make sense to you, and his explanation did not either.

   ….as if you were trying to ‘prove’ something, know what I mean, hmm?

   Correct. That you often make up premises and then use them as a basis for your conclusions.

   Then, when I show that you are woefully ignorant about Semitism, you try to pretend that you know more than the encyclopedias and go on to make up even more fanciful poppycock to try and prove you were correct without providing any credible source on your own behalf. Only someone with a double digit IQ would do so. You must be the only person on this forum that is unaware of what Semitism means and who are included in the term Semitic. The use of anti-Semitic to mean anti-Jew is only because of popular usage. All those Arabs known as Palestinians are Semites.

   I’ve already made clear that I don’t mind being thought stupid.

   OK, so then what are you arguing about?

4. “You seem to suffer from delusions of intelligence.”

   This is so tiresome, Eagle (read that, boring). I’ve already made clear that I don’t mind being thought stupid. (The truth is, I giggle over it, drooling imbecile that I am.) I note, however, that it does seem terribly important for YOU to raise the issue of ‘intelligence’ in virtually every one of your posts whose content differs with the opinions of anybody else… as if you were trying to ‘prove’ something, know what I mean, hmm?

   “…en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitism… etc”</blockquote

   Wikipedia? — that’s your idea of a reliable, objective authority??? — an “encyclopedia” website that ANYBODY can post on??? Too funny! LMAO.

   That’s almost as droll as the proposition that the US Constitution is a “living, breathing document.” (Would you play poker with me: using “living, breathing rules“?)

   I defy you to show me a single, solitary, non-linguistic, actual, applied usage of the word, Semitism, anywhere in literature.

   “…merriam-webster.com/dictionary/semite?… Definition of SEMITE, etc”

   As I’ve noted, you’re lazy, Eagle. You obviously read only as far as you thought necessary to give yoursef a one-up to use on me; then — typically — you stopped reading. (You see? — you don’t post to communicate & share ideas. You post to compete: to find occasion to play “Gotcha.”)

   Go back & read the whole entry. It contains the following: “First known use: 1848.”

   That little factule meshes perfectly well with my earlier remark [Aug 26, 8:49 am]:
   “…the notion that there are “non-Jewish Semites” is BS. The proposition grew up around the mid-19th century efforts of Wilhelm Marr to invent a word to give an air of intellect & dignity to good old-fashioned Judenhass : Jew-hatred…”

   I’m telling you what I told you before, AE: Nobody talked of “Semites” prior to that time (unless of course, they were referring to the Children of Shem, but said Children appear only in the ‘Old’ Testament — which I take seriously but which you regard as a self-serving, Jewish fairy tale, therefore not relevant to rational discourse; so that’s off the table).

   And even today , nobody ever speaks of “Semitism” except in the LINGUISTIC sense of a peculiarity noted in a semitic language, and always preceded by the indefinite article (“a” or “an”)

   — the same way that one speaks of a peculiarity in the English language: “[an] anglicism”

   — or a peculiarity in the Yiddish language: “[a] yiddishism”

   — or a peculiarity in the Frenchlanguage: “[a] gallicism,” etc.

5. “You seem to suffer from delusions of intelligence.”

   This is so tiresome, Eagle (read that, boring). I’ve already made clear that I don’t mind being thought stupid. (The truth is, I giggle over it, drooling imbecile that I am.) I note, however, that it does seem terribly important for YOU to raise the issue of ‘intelligence’ in virtually every one of your posts whose content differs with the opinions of anybody else… as if you were trying to ‘prove’ something, know what I mean, hmm?

   “en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitism, etc”</blockquote

   Wikipedia? — that’s your idea of a reliable, objective authority??? — an “encyclopedia” website that ANYBODY can post on??? Too funny! LMAO.

   That’s almost as droll as the proposition that the US Constitution is a “living, breathing document.” (Would you play poker with me: using “living, breathing rules“?)

   I defy you to show me a single, solitary, non-linguistic, actual, applied usage of the word, Semitism, anywhere in literature.

   “merriam-webster.com/dictionary/semite?show=0&t=1314375302, Definition of SEMITE, etc”

   As I’ve noted, you’re lazy, Eagle. You obviously read only as far as you thought necessary to give yoursef a one-up to use on me; then — typically — you stopped reading. (You see? — you don’t post to communicate & share ideas. You post to compete: to find occasion to play “Gotcha.”)

   Go back & read the whole entry. It contains the following: “First known use: 1848.”

   That little factule meshes perfectly well with my earlier remark [Aug 26, 8:49 am]:
   “…the notion that there are “non-Jewish Semites” is BS. The proposition grew up around the mid-19th century efforts of Wilhelm Marr to invent a word to give an air of intellect & dignity to good old-fashioned Judenhass : Jew-hatred…”

   I’m telling you what I told you before, AE: Nobody talked of “Semites” prior to that time (unless of course, they were referring to the Children of Shem, but said Children appear only in the ‘Old’ Testament — which I take seriously but which you regard as a self-serving, Jewish fairy tale, therefore not relevant to rational discourse; so that’s off the table).

   And even today , nobody ever speaks of “Semitism” except in the LINGUISTIC sense of a peculiarity noted in a semitic language, and always preceded by the indefinite article (“a” or “an”)

   — the same way that one speaks of a peculiarity in the English language: “[an] anglicism”

   — or a peculiarity in the Yiddish language: “[a] yiddishism”

   — or a peculiarity in the Frenchlanguage: “[a] gallicism,” etc.

   What’s more, the term antisemitism has never -— I repeat: never, ever -— been used to characterize hatred of Arabs as Arabs. It may well be possible to hate Arabs-as-Arabs, and such will surely be a species of bigotry when it occurs -— but when it does, it is in NO sense a variety of ‘antisemitism.’

   It is worthy of note, incidentally, that this recent attempt to play cutesy word games to deflect attention from the ugliness of Jew-hatred on the part of Arabs specifically -— and their similarly disingenuous apologists -— by calling them “semites” is itself by no means new. When it had to be applied in-reverse, the transparency of the scam became downright comical:

   When, in the company of his Palestinian Arab cohorts, Hajj Amin al-Husseini -— Grand Mufti of Jerusalem [and who was also President-for-Life of the Supreme Muslim Council, President of the World Islamic Congress, and President, as well, of the Palestine Arab Higher Committee] -— made common cause with the Third Reich during the Second World War, German propagandists went to extraordinary lengths to eliminate the USE of the term “antisemite” in official Nazi publications, and to replace it with alternative language (e.g., “anti-Jew,” “anti-Zionist,” etc) precisely in order to AVOID the absurd & outlandish possibility that they might even conceivably be thought to be lumping the object of their hatred, the Jews, together with this vital Nazi ally, the Arabs. (Fancy that.)

   The bottom line here is that an Arab who hates Jews as Jews most certainly is every bit as much an antisemite as anybody else can be.

   Even Jews can be antisemites; every generation has them.

   In fact, the aforesaid Wilhelm Marr, who used the term -— in an 1879 pamphlet, entitled “The Victory of Judaism Over Germanism: a nonreligious point of view,” a vicious attack on Jews -— was himself an apostate, half-Jew. Karl Marx, the baptised grandson of two rabbis, was likewise the author of pointedly antisemitic articles & tracts. So anybody can be an antisemite -— it’s not an exclusive club, off-limits to M.O.T.’s [Members-of-the-Tribe, y’know].

   And anybody who tells you otherwise isn’t playing with a full deck.

6. “Don’t be a putz.”

   I will be what it suits my conscience to be, HOWSOEVER you choose to characterize it.

   “…constantly means frequently.”

   Ok, if you want that to be your definition of “constantly,” I continue to await your evidence that Yamit frequently fabricates. This has gone on long enough, AE; laziness doesn’t become you. Nor does evasiveness.

   Put up or shut up.

   Your opposing them [Feiglin, Yamit] is — as I’ve already noted — based on (among other things) an intellectual prejudice, not antisemitism.

   No, it is based on their vicious and vile anti-Christian bigotry. No more intellectual than that.

   It is based on Yamit’s bigotry, that’s true. But it IS more intellectual than that, AE, because you are prepared to make assumptions about them, based on limited info as to Feiglin, and your own bald accusations of Yamit’s “CONSTANT making things up.”

   Also Moshe Feiglin’s [bigotry]. He attacked Glenn Beck simply because he is a Christian.

   I already asked you how much you knew about Feiglin, and you gave me some body english without ever returning the ball.

   Cite the words that demonstrate his “bigotry.”

   If it is so plausible [Yamit’s highway adventure, from when he was living in Yamit], why did you have to question him?

   I told you why [Aug 26, 3:32 am]:
   “I simply encouraged him to flesh out the story, AE — for the understanding of myself and anybody else reading the post. I’ve made no judgment for or against the story.”

7. So you don’t have Jewish in-laws? – Your answer is “no”?

   My answer is that this is a comical and unsubstantiated conclusion with no basis in fact.

   Your reply, like the previous ones, is a deft evasion — and not an ‘answer.’

   I’m not asking you for a song-&-dance, AE, and I won’t settle for one.

   I am asking you, point blank, if you are directly related — by blood or by law (and extending out as far, say, as the level of second-cousins) — to anybody who does (or ever did), under any circumstance, self-identify as Jewish. There are two possible answers to the question: A. Yes. B. No.

   Until you provide one or the other, the question will not have been answered.

8. “Don’t be a putz.”

   I will be what it suits my conscience to be, HOWSOEVER you choose to characterize it.

   “…constantly means frequently.”

   Ok, if you want that to be your definition of “constantly,” I continue to await your evidence that Yamit frequently fabricates. This has gone on long enough, AE; quit being lazy. Put up or shut up.

   If it is so plausible [Yamit’s highway adventure, from when he was living in Yamit], why did you have to question him?

   I told you why [Aug 26, 3:32 am]:

   “I simply encouraged him to flesh out the story, AE — for the understanding of myself and anybody else reading the post. I’ve made no judgment for or against the story.”

   You seem to suffer from delusions of intelligence.

   This is so tiresome, Eagle (read that, boring). I’ve already made clear that I don’t mind being thought stupid. I note, however, that it does seem terribly important for YOU to raise the issue of ‘intelligence’ in virtually every one of your posts whose content differs with the opinions of anybody else…

   “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitism”</blockquote

   Wikipedia? — that’s your idea of a reliable, objective authority??? — a website that anybody can post on??? Too funny! LMAO. That’s almost as droll as the proposition that the US Constitution is a “living, breathing document.” (Would you play poker with me: using “living, breathing rules“?)

   I defy you to show me a non-linguistic usage of the word, Semitism, anywhere in literature — ANY literature.

   “http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/semite?show=0&t=1314375302, Definition of SEMITE, etc”

   As I’ve noted, you’re lazy, Eagle. You stopped reading as soon as you thought the entry had given you a one-up on me; then — typically — you stopped reading. (You see? — you don’t post to communicate & share ideas. You post to compete: to find occasion to play one-up.)

   Go back & read the whole entry. It contains the following: “First known use: 1848.”

   That little factule meshes perfectly well with my earlier remark [Aug 26, 8:49 am]:
   “…the notion that there are “non-Jewish Semites” is BS. The proposition grew up around the mid-19th century efforts of Wilhelm Marr to invent a word to give an air of intellect & dignity to good old-fashioned Judenhass : Jew-hatred…”

   Nobody talked of “Semites” before that time (unless of course, they were referring to the Children of Shem, but said Children appear only in the “Old” Testament, and you regard that as a fairy tale, therefore not relevant to rational discourse).

   And even today nobody ever speaks of “Semitism” except in the LINGUISTIC sense of a peculiarity noted in a semitic language
   — the same way that one speaks of a peculiarity in the English language: “[an] anglicism”
   — or a peculiarity in the Yiddish language: “[a] yiddishism”
   — or a peculiarity in the Frenchlanguage: “[a] gallicism,” etc.

   What’s more, the term antisemitism has never -— I repeat: never, ever -— been used to characterize hatred of Arabs as Arabs. It may well be possible to hate Arabs-as-Arabs, and such will surely be a species of bigotry when it occurs -— but when it does, it is in NO sense a variety of ‘antisemitism.’

   It is worthy of note, incidentally, that this recent attempt to play cutesy word games to deflect attention from the ugliness of Jew-hatred on the part of Arabs specifically -— and their similarly disingenuous apologists -— by calling them “semites” is itself by no means new. When it had to be applied in-reverse, the transparency of the scam became downright comical:

   When, in the company of his Palestinian Arab cohorts, Hajj Amin al-Husseini -— Grand Mufti of Jerusalem [and who was also President-for-Life of the Supreme Muslim Council, President of the World Islamic Congress, and President, as well, of the Palestine Arab Higher Committee] -— made common cause with the Third Reich during the Second World War, German propagandists went to extraordinary lengths to eliminate the USE of the term “antisemite” in official Nazi publications, and to replace it with alternative language (e.g., “anti-Jew,” “anti-Zionist,” etc) precisely in order to AVOID the absurd & outlandish possibility that they might even conceivably be thought to be lumping the object of their hatred, the Jews, together with this vital Nazi ally, the Arabs. (Fancy that.)

   The bottom line here is that an Arab who hates Jews-as-Jews most certainly is every bit as much an antisemite as anybody else can be.

   Even Jews can be antisemites; every generation has them.

   In fact, the aforesaid Wilhelm Marr, who used the term -— in an 1879 pamphlet, entitled “The Victory of Judaism Over Germanism: a nonreligious point of view,” a vicious attack on Jews -— was himself an apostate, half-Jew. Karl Marx, the baptised grandson of two rabbis, was likewise the author of pointedly antisemitic articles & tracts. So anybody can be an antisemite -— it’s not an exclusive club, off-limits to M.O.T.’s [Members-of-the-Tribe].

   And anybody who tells you otherwise isn’t playing with a full deck.

   So you don’t have Jewish in-laws? – Your answer is “no”?

   My answer is that this is a comical and unsubstantiated conclusion with no basis in fact.

   Your reply, like the previous ones, is a deft evasion — and not an ‘answer.’

   I’m not asking you for a song-&-dance, AE, and I won’t settle for one.

   I am asking you if you are directly related — by blood or by law (and extending out as far, say, as the level of second-cousins) — to anybody who does (or ever did), under any circumstance, self-identify as Jewish. There are two possible answers to the question: A. Yes. B. No.

   Until you provide one or the other, the question will not have been answered.

9. Dweller writes:
   So you don’t have Jewish in-laws? – Your answer is “no”?

   My answer is that this is a comical and unsubstantiated conclusion with no basis in fact.

   Ted writes:
   Jews are being attacked for their Jewishness, not their semiteness.

   This is true, though the learned scholar, Dweller, apparently had no idea that there were Semites who were not Jews.

10. I’ve no problem understanding slippery. Nor do I have any problem with being called (or thought) ‘stupid’ or ‘slow-witted,’ etc, if that’s what it takes to get my questions answered.

    I cannot be any clearer than “no basis in fact” to anyone who understands English.

    So you don’t have Jewish in-laws?

    — Your answer is “no”?

11. Ted Belman writes:
    Antisemitism has nothing to do with semites and everything to do with Jews. The fact that Jews are to a certain extent “semites” is neither here nor there. Jews are being attacked for their Jewishness, not their semiteness.

    Ted is correct. The term Anti-Semitic is defined as anti-Jewish by virtue of common usage. However, Dweller was wrong to say that there is no such thing as Semitism and that only Jews are Semites. The Palis vowing to wipe Israel off the map are all ethnic Semites as the vile and insufferable Yasser Arafat liked to remind Westeners when he was routinely trying to fool them.

12. Antisemitism has nothing to do with semites and everything to do with Jews. The fact that Jews are to a certain extent “semites” is neither here nor there. Jews are being attacked for their Jewishness, not their semiteness.

13. Dweller writes:
    Sometimes he does seem to play fast & loose with the facts, yes. But “constantly”?

    Don’t be a putz. You don’t seem to know that in English, constantly means frequently. How do you decide when someone so biased and bigoted and prone to making up facts is telling the truth?

    Actually it wasn’t all that far-fetched, Eagle. That’s why I asked [Aug 26, 3:32 am] if you knew the terrain from TA to Sinai, and the Gaza roads. You might perhaps find the tale a bit more plausible if you knew the place.

    If it is so plausible why did you have to question him?

    The reason I don’t know what it means is that there’s no such thing as “Semitism”

    However, the ‘word’ which YOU used was “Semitism” — and I’d never heard that before.
    Nor had anybody else: aint no such critter

    You seem to suffer from delusions of intelligence. Actually, you are not as knowledgeable as you think you are:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitism

    Actually that’s not so. In point of fact, there are no such things as “non-Jewish Semites.”

    As I said, you are not as knowledgeable as you think you are:

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/semite?show=0&t=1314375302

    \?se-?m?t, especially British ?s?-?m?t\

    Definition of SEMITE
    1a : a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs b : a descendant of these peoples

    It is based on Yamit’s bigotry, that’s true.

    Also Moshe Feiglin’s. He attacked Glenn Beck simply because he is a Christian.

    I’ve no problem understanding slippery. Nor do I have any problem with being called (or thought) ‘stupid’ or ‘slow-witted,’ etc, if that’s what it takes to get my questions answered.

    I cannot be any clearer than “no basis in fact” to anyone who understands English.

14. “[D]o your own research, Dweller. Yamit’s comments are all over this forum’s archives.”

    I always do my own research, Eagle; nobody else I’d entrust with it. (And yes, Yamit’s posts are readily accessible.)

    And based on that research, I reject your allegation that he is “constantly making up stuff.” That just doesn’t fly, dude. Sometimes he does seem to play fast & loose with the facts, yes. But “constantly”? — no — sorry, no sale.

    So I left it to you — as the moving party, thus bearing the burden of proof — to justify your claim. I’m still waiting; make your case.

    He couldn’t even give you a plausible explanation for his “run off the road” fantasy.

    Actually it wasn’t all that far-fetched, Eagle. That’s why I asked [Aug 26, 3:32 am] if you knew the terrain from TA to Sinai, and the Gaza roads. You might perhaps find the tale a bit more plausible if you knew the place.

    I had never attacked Semitism. If you don’t know what the term means go look it up.

    The reason I don’t know what it means is that there’s no such thing as “Semitism” — that’s why I asked what you meant by it. (Maybe you should be the one to “go look it up.”)

    Whenever I use the term, antisemitic, I mean Jew-hating.

    [So] You do know what the term means…

    Yes, I know what “antisemitic” means.

    However, the ‘word’ which YOU used was “Semitism” — and I’d never heard that before.

    Nor had anybody else: aint no such critter.

    …even though there are non-Jewish Semites – the delightful Pali’s for example…

    Actually that’s not so. In point of fact, there are no such things as “non-Jewish Semites.”

    There surely ARE such folk as non-Jews who speak semitic languages: Aramaic, Hebrew, Syriac, Arabic, Ancient Phoenician, Assyrian, Babylonian, etc — but the notion that there are “non-Jewish Semites” is BS. The proposition grew up around the mid-19th century efforts of Wilhelm Marr to invent a word to give an air of intellect & dignity to good old-fashioned Judenhass : Jew-hatred — which had graduated from a religiously-based phenomenon, propounded (or condoned) by the Church, to a racially-based one with the coming of the Enlightenment , when Napoleon opened the gates of Europe’s ghettoes & let the Jews out.

    The point is that the word antisemitism was not preceded into the language by “semitism” — the way, say, anti-Communism was preceded by Communism, and anti-matter followed matter.

    There was never any such thing as “semitism.”

    Antisemitism was simply consciously, deliberately CONSTRUCTED to create a new & dignified air around an old stale stink.

    But this is getting out into the weeds. Back on-point:

    If by saying you “had never attacked Semitism,” you meant that you had never attacked em>Judaism, or the faith of the Jewish People, then that’s just not so, AE. You did. You have. You do.

    And that was explicitly what I had in mind when I referred to “the antisemitic element — which most assuredly does creep into (or, better stated: seeps out of) Eagle’s discourse, from time to time.”

    Your opposing them [Feiglin, Yamit] is — as I’ve already noted — based on (among other things) an intellectual prejudice, not antisemitism.

    No, it is based on their vicious and vile anti-Christian bigotry. No more intellectual than that.

    It is based on Yamit’s bigotry, that’s true. But it IS more intellectual than that, AE, because you are prepared to make assumptions about them, based on limited info as to Feiglin, and your own bald accusations of Yamit’s “CONSTANT making things up.”

    So then, you don’t have Jewish in-laws?

    Dweller, what about “no basis in fact” are you having a problem understanding?

    I’ve no problem understanding slippery.

    Nor do I have any problem with being called (or thought) ‘stupid’ or ‘slow-witted,’ etc, if that’s what it takes to get my questions answered.

    So is your answer a flat “no”?

15. Dweller writes:
    If by saying he is “constantly making up stuff,” you mean to allege that he regularly fabricates allegations out of whole cloth, I’m afraid you’ll have to provide illustrations of these fabrications, then show me enough suitable examples of them to justify labeling such lying as ‘constant.’

    Yes. But do your own research, Dweller. Yamit’s comments are all over this forum’s archives. He couldn’t even give you a plausible explanation for his “run off the road” fantasy. So why the hell are you asking me for illustrations?

    I’ve certainly called into question a lot of Yamit’s conclusions – and occasionally some of his facts as well.

    So, then, why are you asking me for illustrations?

    “Never attacked Semitism”? What in blue blazes is that supposed to mean? As long as you’re being “very specific,” define, please, “Semitism.”

    Yamit, who works hand in glove with the anti-Semitic Hamas, in effect, in their goal of weakening the Israeli-Amerocan alliance libeled me as anti-Semitic. I retorted that I had never attacked Semitism. If you don’t know what the term means go look it up.

    Whenever I use the term, antisemitic, I mean Jew-hating.

    You do know what the term means, even though there are non Jewish Semites – the delightful Palis for example, Yamit’s blood brothers..

    Your opposing them is — as I’ve already noted — based on (among other things) an intellectual prejudice, not antisemitism.

    No, it is based on their vicious and vile anti-Christian bigotry. No more intellectual than that.

    So then, you don’t have Jewish in-laws?

    Dweller, what about “no basis in fact” are you having a problem understanding?

16. “Why should I assume it’s not so?”

    “Because it’s YAMIT, that’s why, who is constantly making up stuff to attack the Israeli and American governments.”

    If by saying he is “constantly making up stuff,” you mean to allege that he regularly fabricates allegations out of whole cloth, I’m afraid you’ll have to provide illustrations of these fabrications, then show me enough suitable examples of them to justify labeling such lying as ‘constant.’

    We “double-digit-IQ” types are funny that way.

    I’ve certainly called into question a lot of Yamit’s conclusions

    — and occasionally some of his facts as well.

    And I’ve made plain that I’m none-too-pleased with his apparent admixture of motives from time-to-time.

    But I’d hardly go so far as to claim (or even suggest) that everything he says, or even most of it, is bullshit.

    If YOU would, then I think you’re intellectually prejudiced.

    Don’t know [where the station wagon came from], they could have overtaken me [Yamit] without me noticing ….

    Of course he doesn’t know because it never happened. Dweller pinned him down with obvious inconsistencies in his fairy tale.

    No, I simply encouraged him to flesh out the story, AE — for the understanding of myself and anybody else reading the post.

    I’ve made no judgment for or against the story. There’s a discipline attached to maintaining an open mind.

    (Both you AND Yamit could profit from acquiring that discipline, I daresay.)

    BTW, do you know the road from TA into Sinai, AE?

    Have you ever driven thru Gaza?

    It’s not exactly all straight, level roads & prairie, y’know.

    I don’t think we’re in Kansas any more, Toto.

    Ever visited Israel at all?

    I doubt you can cite any “anti-Semitic” comments that I have made without twisting the truth out of all recognition.

    Of course I can. Wouldn’t even be hard.

    As I noted, however, they’re not typically of a sort that you deliberately broadcast from a bullhorn.

    More often than not they tend to seep out of your posts, perhaps unbeknownst to you, based on assertions about Jews which you swallowed uncritically as a child learning the Baltimore Catechism, or absorbed osmotically, as it were, from the culture in which you were raised.

    I am very specific in what I write, and I have never attacked Semitism.

    “Never attacked Semitism”? What in blue blazes is that supposed to mean?

    As long as you’re being “very specific,” define, please, “Semitism.”

    And while we’re on ther subject of being specific, let me be clear:
    Whenever I use the term, antisemitic, I mean Jew-hating. (And throughout the history of the term, everybody else , as well, has understood it to mean that.) And that’s precisely what I meant when I alluded to “the antisemitic element — which most assuredly does creep into (or, better stated: seeps out of) Eagle’s discourse, from time to time.”

    And I stand by the characterization.

    Opposing Moshe Feiglin and Yamit does not make me anti-Semitic.

    Quite so — of itself, it doesn’t.

    Your opposing them is — as I’ve already noted — based on (among other things) an intellectual prejudice, not antisemitism.

    The “antisemitic element” that I had said “creeps into/seeps out of” your posts shows up in other ways.

    I’d say that our correspondent has Jewish in-laws of one generation or another…

    …comical and unsubstantiated conclusions with no basis in fact.

    So then, you don’t have Jewish in-laws?

17. Dweller writes:
    The antisemitic element — which most assuredly does creep into (or, better stated: seeps out of) Eagle’s discourse, from time to time — is probably composed, in large part, of the as-yet unexamined residue of a pre-Vatican-Two upbringing. Moreover, the chances are that seeing that antisemitic residue up-close occasions him no little embarrassment whenever he is brought face-to-face with it.

    Dweller, this comment is one reason I have never accused you of having a triple digit IQ. I doubt you can cite any “anti-Semitic” comments that I have made without twisting the truth out of all recognition. I am very specific in what I write, and I have never attacked Semitism.

    I openly and unabashedly and unconditionally support Israel and its survival as a Jewish state, oppose the use of the Bible to make political points and chill rational discourse, vehemently oppose anti-Christian Jewish bigots like Moshe Feiglin and Yamit, Yonatan and Shy Guy and oppose liberal American Jews for helping elect Obama and liberals in general for making the world a less prosperous place.

    Opposing Moshe Feiglin and Yamit does not make me anti-Semitic. I am exposing THEIR personal closet anti-Semitism and pretense that they unconditionally support Israel.

    If I were a betting man (I’m not, but if I were), I’d say that our correspondent has Jewish in-laws of one generation or another — and that this, as much as anything, accounts for his interest in Israeli national policy, esp. in re the US.

    Just as I said, definitely a double-digit IQ which results in comical and unsubstantiated conclusions with no basis in fact.

18. Ted Belman writes:
    You are wrong to paint either Feiglin or Yamit in this way. I challenge you to quote either person’s remarks that justify such a condemnation.

    Nice try, Ted, but Moshe Feiglin has attacked Glenn Beck simply for being a Christian, and the Israpundit archives are filled with Yamit’s bilious, anti-Christian, anti-American, anti-Beck, and therefore anti-Israeli rhetoric. They cannot be so viciously against Beck for supporting Israel from his Christian perspective and being supporters of Israel at the same time. Thus my charge that they have their own agenda.

    Your tap dance trying to appreciate Glenn Beck and promote these vile, anti-Christian, anti-Beck bigots at the same time is becoming quite comical.

    On the other hand, I have been scrupulously consistent in my unconditional support for Israel, as well as my opposition to anti-Christian bigotry and the scurrilous, sometimes blasphemous use of the Bible to demean God as some kind of biased joke to make political points and chill rational discussions. In a free society these bigots are free to believe whatever they want but when they bring it into the public square they must be challenged under Edmund Burke’s precept, “All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to stay silent.”

19. AmericanEagle Said:

    Dweller writes:
    Just how much do you know about Feiglin?
    I know enough from his unprovoked and senseless attacks on Glenn Beck that he is a vile, Christian-hating bigot with his own agenda – much like Yamit.

    You are wrong to paint either Feiglin or Yamit in this way. I challenge you to quote either person’s remarks that justify such a condemnation.

20. “I [Yamit] believe you [AE] are… not an Indian Catholic but a Muslim Pakistani…”

    The self-characterization of a “Brit-Catholic-raised-in-India” is probably not bogus, Yamit

    — nor is the pro-Israel stance (such as he views it) likely to be false either.

    The antisemitic element — which most assuredly does creep into (or, better stated: seeps out of) Eagle’s discourse, from time to time — is probably composed, in large part, of the as-yet unexamined residue of a pre-Vatican-Two upbringing. Moreover, the chances are that seeing that antisemitic residue up-close occasions him no little embarrassment whenever he is brought face-to-face with it.

    If I were a betting man (I’m not, but if I were), I’d say that our correspondent has Jewish in-laws of one generation or another — and that this, as much as anything, accounts for his interest in Israeli national policy, esp. in re the US.

21. Dweller writes:
    Just how much do you know about Feiglin?

    I know enough from his unprovoked and senseless attacks on Glenn Beck that he is a vile, Christian-hating bigot with his own agenda – much like Yamit.

    Why should I assume it’s not so?

    I guess P.T. Barnum was right. There IS a sucker born every minute. Because it’s YAMIT, that’s why, who is constantly making up stuff to attack the Israeli and American governments.

    Yonatan writes:
    Moshe Feiglin cares more about Israel than you care about your family.

    Not true. I would not attack anyone who is prepared to stand up for my family and defend them, just because of their religion.

    Yamit writes:
    I believe you are a Soros plant and not an Indian Catholic but a Muslim Pakistani.

    Who cares what you, who is a bird of a feather with Hamas, believes? People who follow this forum will be able to tell the difference between a Christian supporter of Israel like me and a Jew who voted for Obama and tries to weaken Israel by demeaning and weakening its only alliance – with the USA.

    Don’t know, they could have overtaken me without me noticing ….

    Of course he doesn’t know because it never happened. Dweller pinned him down with obvious inconsistencies in his fairy tale.

    One of the first signs something is up is when the Government seeks to disarm those they plan to harm.

    A comment that will put a smile on the faces of his contacts at Hamas.

22. “One of the first signs something is up is when the Government seeks to disarm those they plan to harm.”

    Some things are the same everywhere

    and throughout time.

    He who has ears to hear,

    let him hear…

23. @ dweller:
    dweller Said:

    If there was literally no traffic whatsoever, where could they have come from?

    Don’t know, they could have overtaken me without me noticing or entered the main road from one of the many side roads leading to and from small villages on either side. I don’t think I was paying much attention to what was behind me at the time. I always carried a licence handgun and had an IDF issued Uzi as I was part of our Kitat koninute (rapid emergency response contingent in Yamit). Interesting that about a year and a half before the evacuation of Yamit by the IDF, our weapons were confiscated by the Army and our reserve call ups were cancelled. That kept me out of two call-up cycles in Lebanon. Always some good with the bad. One of the first signs something is up is when the Government seeks to disarm those they plan to harm.

24. @ AmeicanEagle:
    Since you are calling me a liar that puts this on a very personal level.

    So lets get personal: I believe you are a Soros plant and not an Indian Catholic but a Muslim Pakistani. Not a supporter of Israel but a supporter of Muslims and all entities inimical to Jews and Israel. I called you an anitisemite from your first post and have not changed my opinion.

25. Dear Yonatan, AE is a muslim provocateur, don’t take the bait.

26. AmeicanEagle Said:

    Moshe Feiglin is another vile, Christian-hating bigot, who like Yamit, could care less about the security of Israel.

    Its your opinion, and you’re wrong as usual. Moshe Feiglin cares more about Israel than you care about your family. You can’t stand the fact that someone stands up and says what needs to be said. Not politically correct enough for you. If we don’t cowtow to the americans and we don’t bow to the christians, AE labels them as bigots and in same league as hamas. He can’t imagine that the creator of the world would have us rely on his laws rather than the nations to get by. Too bad for you AE.

27. The Palestinians are cornering Israel and trying to knock out punches as long as the UN general assembly is not over.
    The West insists on Israel not to react. Israel could have easily avoid killing Egyptians.
    The war of the West and the Arab Muslims against the Jews continues.
    It does not matter whether the Pa applies for UN membership as long as Israel has the appropriate response for any scenario. There should be no proportionality if violence erupts. Is will not initiate.
    Israel must expect the worst from its enemies and no help from those who pretend to be her friend.
    The Palestinians/Iran will do everything to divert the Arab spring energy and use it against Israel.
    There is no significant difference to expect between Durban III and the UN GA purposes and outcomes.

28. “Moshe Feiglin is another vile, Christian-hating bigot, who like Yamit, could care less about the security of Israel.”

    Just how much do you know about Feiglin?

    C’mon, Dweller. You didn’t really believe that this [“They were trying to kill {Yamit} by causing an accident…”] is a true story, did you?

    Why should I assume it’s not so?

29. Yamit writes:
    What has one thing to do with another I quoted beck to emphasize my point not his. I haven’t changed my opinions of him nor what I believe is his real purpose. I haven’t changed my opinions of you either.

    The only opinion of me that any honest person with more than half a brain and understands English could have is that I am an implacable and steadfast supporter of Israel and its security. Obviously, these criteria would all disqualify Yamit.

    Since Yamit is always trying to damage and weaken Israel by demeaning its alliance and decades of support from its only ally, the USA, I can only conclude that he is a bird of a feather with other enemies of Israel and the US, like Hamas.

    “Glenn Beck doesn’t back the Jewish mission. What drives him is the Christian mission. I have no problem doing business with him, but he has to respect me when he comes here just like I don’t try to force my identity on him when I come to him.”

    “Jews like it when goyim finally smile at them, but sometimes a smile is more dangerous than a scowl, and this is one of those occasions,” Feiglin said.

    Moshe Feiglin is another vile, Christian-hating bigot, who like Yamit, could care less about the security of Israel.

    Rabbi Joshua Levine Grater, who chairs an interfaith group, wrote in the Los Angeles Jewish Journal that Beck’s Restoring Courage event is “nothing more than a media driven, money-making, self-serving, end-of-times messianic- lunacy circus show.”

    Rabbi Joshua Levine Grater is another vile, Christian-hating bigot, who like Yamit and Moshe Feiglin, could care less about the security of Israel.

    Funny most Christians don’t know the 10 commandments and certainly don’t follow them and that includes Beck….What happened for example to the 4th commandment?

    What you have written is not funny because it is a lie. Christians follow the Ten Commandments about as much as Jews do. Yamit, for example, routinely breaks the Second and Third and Ninth commandments in furtherance of his vile bigotry and hate for anyone who is not a nominal Jew.

    Dweller writes:
    What I meant was, had you not noticed them in the rear-view mirror at any point before they were close enough to tail-gate you?
    If there was literally no traffic whatsoever, where could they have come from?

    C’mon, Dweller. You didn’t really believe that this is a true story, did you?

30. “Did you see them coming at all?”

    No they were behind me, there was no traffic at the time in either direction

    What I meant was, had you not noticed them in the rear-view mirror at any point before they were close enough to tail-gate you?

    If there was literally no traffic whatsoever, where could they have come from?

31. @ AmeicanEagle:

    This is the same Yamit who has been trying his best to weaken Israel’s alliance with its only ally, the USA, and has been vilifying Glenn Beck for supporting Israel because he is a Christian and not a Jew. I cannot understand why anyone who REALLY supports Israel would do 6vfgbsuch things

    What has one thing to do with another I quoted beck to emphasize my point not his. I haven’t changed my opinions of him nor what I believe is his real purpose. I haven’t changed my opinions of you either.

    Hawkish Likud activist tells ‘Post’ he objects to US Christian broadcaster’s plan to hold Restoring Courage rally near Temple Mount.

    “Glenn Beck doesn’t back the Jewish mission. What drives him is the Christian mission. I have no problem doing business with him, but he has to respect me when he comes here just like I don’t try to force my identity on him when I come to him.”

    “Jews like it when goyim finally smile at them, but sometimes a smile is more dangerous than a scowl, and this is one of those occasions,” Feiglin said.

    Joe Lieberman pulls out of Glenn Beck’s ‘Courage’ rally (Chickened out?)
    

    Rabbi Joshua Levine Grater, who chairs an interfaith group, wrote in the Los Angeles Jewish Journal that Beck’s Restoring Courage event is “nothing more than a media driven, money-making, self-serving, end-of-times messianic- lunacy circus show.”

    Beck… urged both the Israelis and the Palestinians to “return to their original values, stop listening to voices other than God’s, remember how great He is, relay their values to their children, and obey the 10 commandments.”

    Funny most Christians don’t know the 10 commandments and certainly don’t follow them and that includes Beck….What happened for example to the 4th commandment?
    “And he shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High; and he shall think to change the seasons and the law; and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and half a time.” Daniel 7:25 SEE:(Matthew 5:17-22)

32. Steven L writes:
    Only Israel must apply proportionality in response.

    “Proportional response” when faced by someone wanting to kill a Jew – as the radical Palis are required to do by their founding charters – would literally mean killing the person only after he or she had mortally wounded you and you were in the process of dying. Rational response was what the US did at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It stopped a brutal, four-year war in its tracks in four days.

    Yamit writes:
    Glenn Beck says he has not doubt that Israel is right in the struggle against the Arab world and cannot understand hesitant Israelis.
    Neither can I!!

    This is the same Yamit who has been trying his best to weaken Israel’s alliance with its only ally, the USA, and has been vilifying Glenn Beck for supporting Israel because he is a Christian and not a Jew. I cannot understand why anyone who REALLY supports Israel would do such things.

33. Glenn Beck: No Doubt that Israel is Right
    Glenn Beck says he has not doubt that Israel is right in the struggle against the Arab world and cannot understand hesitant Israelis.

    Neither can I!!

    Sen. Lieberman chickens out. Didn’t expect anything else from that Kapo!

34. @ dweller:

    Did you see them coming at all?

    No they were behind me, there was no traffic at the time in either direction especially on coming. They hit my left tail and fender. I braked instinctively and spun to the other side of the road half on and off the apron. There could only be one explanation. They were trying to kill me by causing an accident. With Arabs I have more than nine lives. Working on 13 or 14 as I write. 😉

35. “…I was suddenly hit, I was rear-ended by a station wagon with five Arabs….”

    Did you see them coming at all?

36. Someone needs to give this moron a copy of the Hamas Charter.

37. The good news and bad news about Linde. Bad news: It was quite clear from his introductory piece that Linde is a man of the Left. Good news: It’s obvious that he is also a very weak one and doesn’t have an original idea in his head.

38. Only Israel must apply proportionality in response. Do the Libyans, the Iranians, the Syrians, the Saudis, the Frenches, the Brits, the Russians, the Chineses or the US apply proportionality. We all know the answer. They DO NOT. Furthermore in all these conflicts, no party wants to eliminate the opponent. All the Muslim countries want to eliminate Israel.
    Why then accept proportionality. It is an aberration of the West and the Muslims to return the Jews into bondage.

    We Jews must do away with this aberration.

39. General George Patton knew how to fight a war

    Lessons From A Master of War

    By Prof. Paul Eidelberg

    “Never let the enemy rest.” No cease fires or hudnas. Unconditional surrender should be Israel’s proclaimed war aim!

    “We want the enemy to KNOW that they are fighting the toughest fighting men in the world!” This precludes benevolence (which Arabs despise). Just as Hezbollah warriors would show no mercy to you, so you should show no mercy to them. These warriors must be killed even if this results in civilian casualties.

    “Forget about army regulations . [which] are written by those who have never been in battle.Our only mission in combat is to win.” Hence general officers may sometimes have to disobey orders of the political echelon!

    The Government should not be deterred by fear of world opinion, UN condemnation, and possible sanctions. This fear cannot but undermine the General Staff and the fighting spirit of Israeli soldiers. This fear is baseless.

    It is of capital importance that Israel’s ruling elites pursue the war in Gaza as a war between good and evil. The IDF will have to become a virtual killing machine to stop the killing once and for all!

40. Israel: Offensive or Defensive?

    By Harry Fisher

    He was not big on taking captives. He did not want any one standing Germans up against the wall and shooting them. Hell, he said, kill the bastards before you get them to a wall.

    Patton’s philosophy was simple. “Attack, attack and keep attacking.” Never give your enemy a chance.
    
    One time we came into a German village. They put out white flags to surrender. When our boys walked in and came close to the village buildings, they started shooting at them – an ambush. They retreated quickly. Patton gave the order to bring up the artillery and told them to level the whole damn village. Hell, he didn’t care who was there, men, women or children. He leveled it and left it as a lesson to them if they were going to pull the same trick again what to expect.

    Today Israel is being attacked daily from the Gaza strip. She ignores it and it only gets worse. I want to tell you that building thicker roofs for the people in S’derot is not the answer; the Arabs will only get bigger bombs. How thick can you make a roof to protect people? What happens if they walk outside? Will the Israeli government build them tunnels under the street so that they may crawl to the market and to their jobs?

    I believe that the Israeli government is making a mistake in being so lenient with Hamas. It is hard to send men into a war knowing that some of them won’t come back. But the more Israel waits, the worse the situation will get.

    Remembering Sergeant Harry Fisher

    By Eliezer Cohen

    One day before a big battle, Sarge was fond of recalling, Patton came into their camp and got on top of his command car and began talking to the troops. “Yesterday,” he said, “we captured some Germans. As we were loading them into a truck, one of the bastards pulled out a gun and shot my driver! You know what we did? We opened fire with our machine guns and killed every last bastard! Don’t try to take prisoners! Shoot the sons-of-bitches before they can surrender!”

    Patton was tough, but you had to be tough to win a war. Harry wished that the Israeli Army could emulate Patton. Harry had the same advice for the Israelis as Patton had given him. “Don’t try to take prisoners! Shoot the sons-of-bitches before they can surrender!” He felt that the solution to our problems with the Arabs was showing them who is in charge and what will happen if they even try to start up.

41. There once were true military warriors My dad served under one of them:

    My dad was a cavalryman and so was I. So was Patton! A tribute to all Cavalryman. Here ”Garry Owen”
    
    Patton speaks narrated by RR!!!

    Pattons speech to his men.

42. Linde is divorced from reality. Horovitz tried to be fair and balanced, though his former editorship of the Jerusalem Report,sometimes showed through. I’ve been impressed with Liat Collins who edits the International edition. She would do a much better job. Caroline Glick is much too valuable as a commentator to have her time taken up in editing.

43. @ LT COL HOWARD:
    Be sure to read this article and the comments.

    Don’t Muddy the Waters.

44. Palestine will soon be a reality, even if its boundaries have not been determined, and Israel doesn’t accept it. Israel is already a reality, although its final borders have not yet been set, either. What will be necessary after September is for negotiators of good faith to sit down and work out a way the two can coexist. For the sake of both.

    Kum Ba Ya

    Someone’s laughing, Lord, kum ba yah!
    Someone’s laughing, Lord, kum ba yah!
    Someone’s laughing, Lord, kum ba yah!
    O Lord, kum ba yah!

45. @ TED:Thank you. I appreciate the reference and agree wholeheartedly with the article. There are many other fine works by reputable scholars that say and document the same thing. I will quote from your article: “It is morally repugnant to sacrifice your own soldiers to save the lives of your enemies. ”

    Proportionality has always meant not using means greater than necessary (in terms of creating civilian casualties) in order to accomplish your military objectives. This does not apply to destroying the military forces capability of your enemies. Here, you want to do the maximum damage at the minimum cost. For example if you have a machine gun and the enemy has bows and arrows you do not have to put your forces within range of his forces. Nor do you have to stop short of annihilation. To use the example in the article that you referred me to, if someone comes out and punches me in the nose and I am in danger of bleeding to death, or falling the cracking my skull, or some other equally daunting fate, then it is perfectly okay for me to burn down the house from which he comes to attack me if that would prevent or deter a future attack.

    My criticism of the IDF in Jenin was based on my work with the Palestinian Authority and physicians for professional responsibility. The hospital administrator (a Palestinian Authority appointee) and I estimated total Palestinian fatalities at 60. Most of these were fighters (and most of the civilians were those that remained with the fighters to cook, load ammunition, etc.). The IDF employed direct frontal assault tactics to minimize civilian casualties. Thus, I estimate that more than 20 IDF soldiers were killed that would not have died had Israel employed more massive weapons and air attacks against the Palestinian terrorists. The world was not grateful. The UN and the US bought into the Palestinian narrative of “massacre”,( mass burials, 600 dead, morgues overflowing, etc.) thus the UN and the US both condemned Israel. When the facts came out no one apologized for the false condemnations. And the PA had won the propaganda war.

46. @ LT COL HOWARD:

    I believe in a “proportionate response”.

    I believe always in a disproportional response: Ultimately leading to “NO ARABS NO TERROR”

    Your suggestion if it succeeds will only be sustainable for the time it takes them to reconstitute and rebuild and increase their strength and capabilities. Been there done that and it is at best only temporary.

    What might have worked with the previous generation of Arabs won’t work today. They do not fear or respect us as enemies even though they concede our superior strength. The Arab youth is universally more radicalized and ideological/religious than their parents.

    Israel can live quite well with the current status quo, they can’t. It’s stupid to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to eliminate a 200 dollar kassam rocket and the launching crew. To think that 30 years ago I used to shop in Gaza city, eat in their restaurants and employ their labor. Visit some in their homes and they visited mine. I went native and visited Bedouins encamped close to Yamit and bring them fresh and powered milk. ice pops for the kids. Later when I lived in T/A i employed Arabs from Yatah next to Hebron, some of my workers lived in caves with poured concrete floors and iron doors at the entrances but caves none the less. I would often drive to Hebron at midnight Sat. nights to pick them up. We were welcomed even though they were sleeping when I came but the women would even then rise and prepare a feast for us before we were allowed to leave. Yet given the chance they would slit our throats such was the culture. The young Arabs today would not be servile or show the same hospitality.

    Once when driving home to Yamit from T/A I had to drive through the Gaza strip and Rafah. On an open road with no traffic either way I was suddenly hit, I was rear-ended by a station wagon with five Arabs. I spun to the other side of the road they lost control and hit an electric pole. There was still no traffic and it was before cell phones. I got out of the car walked to the Arabs car. All five of them showed no signs of life but I made sure and put a bullet in each to make sure. An army patrol eventually arrived, gave them my details and drove home with a smashed left taillight and a popped trunk.

    They tried to kill me by making it look like an accident. They still do the same thing inside of Israel and get away with it.

    The Middle east ain’t the American Middle West. All of the Arabs must go! How? It’s up to them. Where? I don’t care.

47. @ LT COL HOWARD:
    You will be very interested in this.

    Bomb Gaza before invading.

48. Previously, I posted the following:”Unfortunately, some Israeli writers and organizations have given the rejectionist leadership the picture that Israel is uncertain and divided.” at that time I was not aware that Steve Linde had written the editorial reproduced above. I agree, not with Linde, but with the idea that Israel should not panic. the principle is don’t get mad, get even.

    The PA has aligned itself with Hamas & missiles and attacks on the ground have been coming in from Gaza. That is an act of war. Simultaneously with and following Friday’s terrorist attack, 22 rockets struck Israel, aimed at towns of Ashdod, Beersheba, Ashkelon and the smaller Sdot Negev, Shar Hanegev and Eshkol villages in a continuous blitz. Ten worshippers were injured – two seriously – when one of the six Grads aimed at Ashdod hit a synagogue. Police detonated a second in a controlled explosion. The town’s population is advised to stay in sheltered spaces.?as Palestinians fire Grad, Qassam missiles at Israel; Red alerts have sounded in Gedera, Kiryat Gath and Gan Yavne.

    I believe in a “proportionate response”. The appropriate proportion is whatever it takes to make sure with more than 99% certainty that the job is done. This should be Israel’s publicly announced goal. Whether that means 2 to 1; 5 to 1; 10 to 1; 25 to 1; or whatever, and whether it includes taking out one or 2 levels above one or 2 levels below of the terrorist organizations that planned and conducted these operations, should be the judgment made by the appropriate intelligence/military authorities. Then, Israel should ask: the journalists” and other critics: “ Do you have concrete suggestions to make which you guarantee will be effective?” In the meantime, you NGOs , international journalists , etc.,we invite, (no, we demand), that you set up your headquarters in those Israeli towns subject to missile assaults. if you don’t have skin in the game then we don’t want to hear your posturing. Steve Linde and you writers from Haaratz are you listening?

49. Recently I canceled my subscription to the Jerusalem Report because I found them ,for the most part, left-wing biased. Worse they are very selective in the facts they present and in the articles they chose to highlight. For example, when an Arab family in East Jerusalem was evicted from a house with Jewish ownership that had been established through the Israeli courts, the Jerusalem Report would talk about how the Arab family had lived in that home for 42 years (not explaining :that the house had been seized from Jews when the Jews were expelled by the Jordanians from East Jerusalem ;and that all Jewish property had been seized and Arab families had been moved in to occupy the Jewish properties. Also not explain was the fact that the Palestinians had full access to the liberal leaning Israeli courts who found -after many years of litigation where the Palestinians were supported by liberal Jewish lawyers-that the Jews had rightful title to the property. The pictures accompanying the story always showed the Palestinian family camped outdoors, even though in the Palestinian extended family, other shelter was always immediately forthcoming.)

    I read the New York Times and Haaratz. That the Jerusalem Post may be heading in that direction should be alarming to all Jews and all Israelis. I’ve already seen the Forward decline. Given the Palestinian Authority media and Haaratz Israel does not need more of the same.

50. The Jerusalem Post has gone the way of the NY Times. Just as Mr.Herzog had been a reader of the Jerusalem Post, I was reader of the NY Times for longer than 60 years. I cancelled my subscription several years ago.