Expose 'anti-Israelism' for what it is...

[GabysPoppy]

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1076233682575&p=1006953079865

Some selected paragraphs - go to the editorial for the entire piece.

"But as Minister-without-Portfolio Natan Sharansky made clear, where Israel is criticized illegitimately, that is anti-Semitism. Where Israel is criminalized, judged by a double standard or its very existence is delegitimized, that is anti-Semitism."

snip

"What good does it do for European states to mark Holocaust Remembrance Day if their newspapers think it legitimate to employ anti-Jewish caricatures in their cartoons? I am thinking of the recent Independent (London) cartoon showing Prime Minister Ariel Sharon naked, blood-spattered, and grinning as he chews on Palestinian babies. The cartoon invokes the memory of similar caricatures of the Jew which appeared in the Nazi-era newspaper Der Stuermer."

snip

"On December 6, 2003 the Calusca Library in Milan, a center of extreme Left activism, organized the presentation of a text denying the Holocaust. An angry – albeit extreme – comrade explained that the revolution has to take place now, and in order to find new allies it is necessary to deny the murder of European Jewry. It is the price to be paid for solidarity."

snip

"Jews, in large measure, feel themselves naturally allied to the Left. More than that, even now Jews perceive themselves as receiving legitimacy from the Left.
Paradoxically, our real weapon is that very legitimacy – which we must turn around and use to deny the anti-Semities.
Jews must stop making excuses for anti-Semitism, regardless of its source. With the moral force of old allies who have became enemies, we must challenge what has happened to the Left."

snip

The entire piece is very worth reading

[wellst0nev0ter]

1. What If The Crusaders Were Successful

And renamed the region "Christiania" or something, would resentment towards Christians be based on their religion or based on the fact that they have occupied land based on the fiat of their religion?

[GabysPoppy]

3. I would have voted for Wellstone too had I lived in his home State

But by the time he died at age 58 in a tragic plane crash last Friday in Eveleth, Minn. -- along with his wife; Sheila, 58; his daughter, Marcia; three campaign staffers; and two pilots -- the two-term senator was hailed in Jewish circles for being one of the Senate's strongest supporters of Israel.

In recent years he signed or co-sponsored various congressional letters in support of Israel, including one to President Bush criticizing Arafat and urging the administration not to meet with Arafat until the Palestinians ended violence against Israel.

Wellstone also supported moving the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

http://www.jewishsf.com/bk021101/us16.shtml


I would have also voted for him to be President. He was a great, great man.

[wellst0nev0ter]

29. I'm Well Aware Of His Support For Israel

Doesn't mean I should stop voting for him, and it doesn't mean you should sidetrack the issue surrounding the merit of the new anti-Semitism.

So which is it, has the anti-Semitism always been there, or is it the product of creating a Jewish state in formerly Arab territory?

[GabysPoppy]

33. It has always been there

Is there a doubt in your mind?

[drdon326]

35. Hey GP !!!!!

take a trip down memory lane:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=19403&forum=DCForumID66&archive=yes#183

[bluesoul]

2. Funny

"...anti-Jewish caricatures in their cartoons? "

Gee that reminds me of the mirror image Cox&Forkum and their anti-Palestinian/Arab/Muslim caricatures posted here as "legitimate" criticism. Oh my...

[Blitz]

22. Do Cox and Forkum mock

Palestinians and Arabs or just extremist fanatics and specific individuals such as Arafat, Hussein, Judge Roy Moore and, often, Bush? Do you acknowledge that C&F have often drawn Iranian and Iraqi people in a good and even noble light?

What's funny is someone making this charge without evidence. Kinda like accusing a poster of smearing Palestinians or Arabs when he was specifically talking about terrorists only.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Blitz]

30. I will state as a fact that Cox & Forkum

have not released a single cartoon that contains "anti-Palestinian/Arab/Muslim caricatures." Not one. They draw unflattering pictures of terrorists and religious fanatics who are clearly labeled as such and caricatures of all of the specific people that they draw including Arafat, Sharon, Bush, Powell, Kim, Khameini, Rumsfeld, Chirac, etc. However, they make no racist or bigoted caricatures of any specific ethnic group or demographic. Either provide a link that refutes this assertion or retract your assertion to the contrary.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jack Rabbit]

36. BlueSoul has nothing to retract

My own views on C&F were posted last month.

Please click here.

[Blitz]

37. Your views re: Cox and Forkum, like Bluesoul's, are entirely in error

And your examples in the linked post support my position that they create unflattering caricatures of terrorists and religious extremists. Your assertion that they use exaggerated semitic features when drawing Arabs is unsupported by your examples (unless you believe that Afarat and his appearance is representative of all Arabs) and it is not reflected in any of their cartoons.

Your assertion that they never portray Muslims or Arabs in a positive light is demonstrably false. Now, apparently even links to a page with a cartoon in it will get deleted so, to try to stay within the rules, I will direct you to the C&F site and to the cartoons from the following dates: 02/03/04, 12/16/03, 11/07/03, 11/03/03, 07/16/03, 07/09/03, 07/08/03, 06/19/03 and 04/16/03. Who are C&F criticizing with the 9/15/03 cartoon and are they being anti-semitic by drawing Sharon with "exaggerated semitic features?" Perhaps they're being cartoonists.

C&F are among the better political cartoonists working (and John Cox is both a fine illustrator and an outstanding painter). They criticize terrorists, they criticize Bush, they are advocates for the forces of democracy in Iran and Taiwan and they criticize religious fanatics and other extremists. Their political views do not match those of many people on this forum so, instead of confronting them on the issues, people take the intellectually lazy shortcut of smearing them as bigots; a charge that does not stand up under scrutiny.

Bluesoul does have something to retract. So do you.

[drdon326]

39. ugrr....

please check your in-box.

thank you.

[Violet_Crumble]

57. Both bluesoul and Jack Rabbit have nothing to retract...

It only takes a bit of scrutiny through the archives to see that yr claim is wrong and that the hatred from that site emimating towards groups like Arabs, Democrats, Muslims, Democrats, France, is disgusting. Maybe you can explain, to give but one example, how exactly the Organisation of the Islamic Conference are terrorists or religious extremists? It was given a nasty little caricature of a beady-eyed little person waving a sword around...

I checked one of the supposed examples of Muslims or Arabs being portrayed in a positive light. A cartoon of a baby in a pram with a little Statue of Liberty dangling over it is NOT a portrayal of an Arab or Muslim, but a very clear symbol of what these bigoted idiots call 'liberty'...

Dude, Sharon's got a big nose. Of course cartoonists tend to focus on things like that when drawing caricatures of political leaders. Where it crosses the line into bigotry is when they portray leaders with crude features of animals meant to evoke negative reactions (eg, snakes, weasels, etc). Clumsy and crude are what comes to mind when looking at those cartoons on that site, not talented and really really good stuff....

Hey, you forgot to mention that C&F spend a lot of time criticising Democrats and not in the same way they criticise Bush and the Republicans the few times they find time to do that. I was particularly impressed with this particular criticism of the Republicans in one of their sophomoric blurbs, though ;)

This is what Bush gets for trying to out socialist the Democrats.

There's absolutely nothing intellectually lazy about pointing out bigotry where it exists. And in this case, it well and truly exists, because the same excuses used to defend C&F cartoons if applied to cartoons that probably many of the same people doing the excusing claim are anti-Semitic would mean that those cartoons aren't in fact anti-Semitic at all, and I'd disagree as strongly with that conclusion as I would with the same conclusion about C&F....

Oh yeah, I wasn't aware that Democrats are extremists, because that's what C&F portrays them as....

Violet...

[Jack Rabbit]

58. Thank you for the additional references

First of all, in discussing Cox and Forkum per se, there is probably nothing wrong with linking to their work; I have a problem with linking to a racist characterization to drive home a particular point of view. However, we are discussing whether specific instances of that view are racist. Of course, that is up to the mods. Please note that I linked to three instances of their work in the post of January 21 in which the thesis that their work is racist was adumbrated.

As one sympathetic to the dissidents and reformists in Iran, the cartoons on that subject stand out among Cox and Forkuim's work in that they begin to show an enlightened point of view not seen elsewhere in their canon. However, taking their work as a whole leads me to believe that I support the dissidents and reformists for different reasons than do Cox and Forkum. To me, they represent a hope that Iran will move toward democracy, a state where citizenship is universal and equal; regardless of what ideology or set of interests they represent, twelve stuffy old men deciding who can and cannot run for a seat in parliament is not a democratic system and no mandate from voters can make it such. Democracy is worth supporting for its own sake. Cox and Forkum would have reservations about it if these democratic forces were also expressing disdain for American values. They hold those values to be superior to all others. It is noteworthy that the dissident are in western garb while the villains are in local garb. What Cox and Forkum support is not democracy, but a cultural imperialism. That is racist.

Otherwise, the drawings you suggest be examined do more to reinforce my view that Cox and Forkum's work is racist. True, we have a new Arab/Muslim caricature in these works not considered in the post last month: that of pathetic victim. An Afghan woman proclaiming her freedom from the Taliban is mugged by a couple of thugs; an Iraqi baby in a crib, representing what Cox and Forkum would have the world believe is the new Iraqi freedom brought by the benevolent Americans, is threatened by a couple of infanticidal maniacs in local garb. Again, we see the "hopes" of the people from "freedom" represented as a helpless, pathetic being, a victim. The message in these drawings is that Arabs and Muslims seeking freedom are incapable of asserting themselves. Again, that kind of characterization is racist.

In the Iraqi baby cartoon, the child's crib toy is a miniature Statue of Liberty, an American symbol. I see in the other window I have open that this symbolism is not lost on Ms. Crumble. The message is clear: liberty is an American idea and Americans have an obligation to spread this idea for the benefit of the entire world. This is nothing more than an updated version of the old White Man's Burden rationale for imperialism. It is racist.

I see no reason to retract any statement to the effect that Cox and Forkum's work is racist. No retraction is forthcoming here.

As for your remarks concerning Mr. Cox's technical skill, I am in agreement. He is a very talented racist.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

4. My problem is that Sharon

seems to think there is no legitamate criticism of Israel. Personally, I support the Israelis and Palestinians who are working together to find a peaceful solution to this terrible problem. Does this make me anti-Semetic? I don't think so, but there are those who think anyone who disagrees with Sharon and Lekud should automatically wear that label.

[Gimel]

5. Legitimate criticism

This means when there are reasonable alternatives presented, other than the suggestion that Israel do nothing to stop terrorist attacks. Sharon was democratically elected in 2001 and in 2003. To claim that he is all powerful and a dictator organizing attacks for the love of killing is, I think anti-Semitic, because it so distorts truth.

Sharon is tough minded, but he deals with criticism daily. I'm not saying that you can't prefer peace, but to allow terrorists to destroy civilians at random would be rejected by the leader of any country, and in Israel Labor as well as Likud.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

7. I know Sharon was elected

Many Republicans say that Bush was elected. When we criticize Bush freepers call us 'unpatriotic' at the very least. It just seems to me that this "anti-Semite" charge is similar, especially when one espouses a legitimate alternative to Sharon's policies that have both Israel and Palestine working to promote peace and stop terror.

[Gimel]

9. If you see that as a real alternative

However, that side-steps the issue of the suicide bombing attacks. Promoting peace through cooperation has always been the goal. Many projects were underway, including peace negotiations which were torpedoed by the Intifada.

Criticizing Bush's policies is not unpatriotic if you have the good of the people at heart. You may be wrong, however, and your ideas may not be realistic. You have to accept that possibility as well. That means accepting criticism of your ideas.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

16. Of course,

but I won't accuse people of being anti-Islamic just because they disagree with me. But what I have seen from some Likud and Sharon supporters is when one mentions anything that is not in the party line, one is considered anti-Semetic. In the eyes of these people, that's all they need to say, which handily keeps them from explaining the rationale for policies or for looking at other ideas that might bring a peaceful solution.

[Gimel]

21. For example?

A lot of Israeli Knesset members are complaining that Sharon doesn't follow the party line of the Likud. Are they called anti-Semitic, too?

What party line or policy specifically do you remember that caused someone to be labeled anti-Semitic because they criticized it? They said the security anti-terror fence wasn't on the Green Line. I explained that it could be moved, it wasn't permanent. I didn't call anyone anti-Semitic for saying that, however.

[GabysPoppy]

6. No madam it doesn't automatically make you anti-Semitic

However if your criticism contains everything but the kitchen sink such as claiming the hole in the bagel is a Likud plot to starve the Palestinians, it just might label you as such.

It has been said here so may times but I will repeat it again because it seems need to be repeated.

"Legitimate criticism of a Likud or Sharon policy is not inherently anti-Semitic"

That should answer your question directly I hope.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

8. Why so defensive?

Sorry, but all I mentiioned was the actions of peace groups in the area working towards peace. Nothing about the kitchen sink or bagels. I have Jewish family members and friends!

Personally, I think the problem is one that has to be solved locally, because it began locally. It will take people with the wisdom of Soloman and the patience of Job to settle this.

[GabysPoppy]

10. Not being defensive at all

just proving trying to make a point. I am sorry you didn't get it.

If anything I was agreeing with you. I am sorry you didn't get that point either.

[bluesoul]

11. Nope

it's being anti-Likud! As a liberal I am a proud anti-Likudnik. They represent everything I don't stand for. Not even mentioning the policies in the OT...

[GabysPoppy]

12. Including the bagel theory?

[David__77]

13. The left is not monolithic on these questions.

There are many people on the left who are indeed pro-Zionist. In Israel itself, there are left Zionist parties. The Labor Party is still a member of the Socialist International. I think that some rightist elements wish to aggravate the splits between socialists and other leftists in Israel and those in Europe and elsewhere in order to drive Israelis to the right.

I think that the left has a much better track record in fighting anti-Semitism than the right, regardless of some anarchistic and fascist "national" elements in Europe who are painting themselves in left colors. It's like the Russian "National Bolsheviks" who call themselves Leninists yet appeal with fascist insignia and rail against Jewish "conspiracies." It's not that the left has gone over to anti-Semitism, it's that anti-Semites have infiltrated the left. It's not new--even the Nazis during the 1920's had a faction of "Strasserites" who tried to seem leftist and "progressive," but were certainly rejected by the real left in Germany.

The left needs to be challenged to root out anti-Semitism and contuously recommit to the fight against its influence. That includes its perspective on the situation in Israel/Palestine. It is not acceptable to appeal to racist caricatures or Nazi lies in order to form some kind of "tactial alliance" as spoken by this Italian "leftist." This is opportunistic logic--fascist logic of expediency without moral guidance.

[Guinness]

14. www.jewsagainstzionism.com

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/

[GabysPoppy]

15. As soon as I saw the Satmar Rebbe, that was enough for me

If you are unaware of what you posted I can understand. If you are aware of what you posted, I understand even more.

[Guinness]

17. Just pointing out that

being anti-Israel is not the same as being anti-Jew.

[GabysPoppy]

18. Have you met many Satmars?

[David__77]

19. Are these the Jews that meet with the Nation of Islam?

I recall reading the "Final Call" published by Nation of Islam and seeing a meeting with a certain Jewish group that looked like they were ultra-orthodox. Is that this group?

[GabysPoppy]

20. They are for the most part living in Meir Sharim

I am not aware of "Final Call".

But the Satmars have some very interesting ideas to say the least.

[David__77]

24. I believe...

I think they say that Zionism is a religious heresy because certain "prophecies" have not yet been fulfilled that they believe are required before Jews can lay claim to Israel. It's a form of fundamentalism.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[drdon326]

26. WOW

"What a fcuking idiot"


IS HE??

[tinnypriv]

32. Sure

Sharansky is ultra-right, no matter his personal history.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tinnypriv]

59. There is a perfectly good discussion and definition of anti-semitism

In "The Politics of Anti-Semitism". I suggest you read it.

[Carl21014]

38. Israel could alway free the Palestinian people who...

have been killed, oppressed, denied basic rights and stolen from for decades. Then we would know for certain that critisizum of Israel was anti-semitism. Until then we'll have to assume some of critisizum is legitimate.

[Blitz]

40. Free them?

How would Israel go about "freeing" them? Have they been enslaved up until now? If Israel says to the "Palestinian" people that they are "free," what would change? What would that freedom entail? And who is this we that you speak of? Are you part of a group that shares your views on "squatting Jews" or is that a royal "we?"

[Carl21014]

41. It would mean...

an end to occupation rule. An end to check points and curfews. An end to hiways reserved for Israeli only. An end to settlers destoying olive orchards.

It would mean giving Palestinians a vote in the Israeli government that has ruled them for decades. It would mean basic human rights that Israel has denied arabs for decades.

[Blitz]

42. So you want all Palestinians

Whether they are Israeli citizens or not, to be able to vote in Israeli elections? You want Palestinians who are not Israeli citizens, including members of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, Tanzim, Force 17, The Al Aqsa Martyr's Brigade, the PLFP, etc., who are not Israeli citizens, to have unfeterred and unchecked access into any and all parts of Israel?

[Muddleoftheroad]

44. It's the same thing the UN expects

And it's equally ridiculous.

[Carl21014]

45. Yes! That's what I want!

I want them to have the same basic Human rights all people deserve. I can understand Israel's fear. They have oppressed these people for so long it's impossible for them to believe the Palestinian could ever forgive them and live in peace.

It's the same fear the white South Africans had of the blacks they had locked up in cantons. But it was the just thing to do, it was inevitable because the evil it takes to oppress an entire people will eventually destroy you. Just as Isreal will be destroyed if they do not stop what everyone including the majority of Israeli citizens know must stop.

The occupation must end and the long suffering people of Palestine must be set free!

Emancipate them, or leave their land!

[Blitz]

46. You want non-Israelis to vote in Israeli elections

Should Saudis get to vote in Israeli elections as well? The Israelis want the Palestinians to forgive them?? Maybe in Bizarro world.

The "Palestinians" (because "Arabs that neither Jordan nor Egypt wants" was too bulky a name) have been essentially self-ruling since Olso. The PA has run their schools, their media, their universities, their police force, etc. They have used this freedom to murder Israelis and promote hatred among themselves and their children towards Israelis. They have taken virtually none of the steps necessary towards the promotion of peace or the establishment of a modern, civilized nation, in spite of all the help in the world in doing so.

[Carl21014]

55. Please!

Israel has occupied Palestine for decades and has murdered them 3-1. Don't tell me of murder. By tank or by suicide bomber it's still murder.

Yes I want Arabs to be given a vote. If Israel won't give back the land, then the Arabs who still live there deserve and demand their rights. They demand freedom!

[Jack Rabbit]

60. Dissenting

There are rules on this forum about using certain loaded words. I moderated the forum at the time those were implemented. One loaded word that got left off the list is Israel.

To me, Israel does not include the West Bank and Gaza. I call this concept Israel proper. To others, it does; this is called Greater Israel. Still to some others, Israel means Israel proper when taking about the rights of Arabs who live inside the Green Line and to justify not treating Arabs in the Occupied Territories as citizens, but in the very next sentence speak of Greater Israel when justifying the building of settlements. When putting in my two cents, I invariably reject this duel use of the word Israel.

Now, Mr. Carl, I'd like to know: just how you define Israel?

The problem is this: If Israel is defined as Israel proper, then there is no reason why Israel should grant Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza the right to vote in Israeli elections. Of course, the trade off to that to Israel is that there is no reason to for any Israeli to expect to be able to live in the Occupied Territories subject to Israeli law and to have any representation in the Knesset. On the other hand, if Israel is defined as Greater Israel, then there is every reason to grant all those born within her river-to-the-sea boundaries the right to vote, regardless of nationality. Otherwise, those who continue to claim Israel is a democracy need to rethink their definition of democracy. It sure isn't the same as mine.

My problem reading your posts is that you, too, seem to be trying to have it both ways at once. Do you mean by Israel Greater Israel, in which case in order to remain a democracy Israel should grant Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza the right to vote; or do you mean Israel proper, in which case the conflict must be resolved in a negotiated settlement that adjusts borders and ends the occupation?

I would appreciate your clarification.

[Carl21014]

63. I agree.

Like you say, the Pro Israel sides want it both ways. They want to claim all the land when defending settlements, and hold it at arms length when denying rights to the natives.

What I want is simple. I want Israel to stop denying the basic human rights of the Palestinian people who they have ruled through military occupation since 1967. After 37 years I think it's reasonable to assume Israel isn't ever leaving. So they need to grant equal right to the arabs they have ruled for nearly four decades.

This isn't anything new, it's the same lesson we learned in the United State, and South Africa learned. Unjust systems that have an underclass who have different rights can not survive. The evil of oppression itself will destroy you. It makes no differences how you diguise it - Separate but equal like we tried in the US or the pretense of a separate nation through cantons built to resemble autonomy within the greater athority like Israel and S. Africa. Isreal will either correct the system themselves or it will destroy them eventually.

More and more Israel's spin falls on deaf ears, and people say "Yes terrorists! But what about your sin? What of your murder? What of land you stole? Why do you kill farmers and bulldoze their orhcards? What of the innocent Palestinians who you deny life and liberty at your whim for decades now. Many of those questions come from inside Israel - it's a symptom of an evil system that can not last. From within or though outside pressure it will fail because it is unjust and currupt.

One day goodwill and assistance toward Israel will change to sanction and pressure. No one can deny it has already begun. The US is the only friend Israel has left, and America won't stand next to a currupt system forever.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Blitz]

48. Find a dictionary

and look up anti-semitism. While you're at it, do a little research on the history of the term. Anti-semitism refers ONLY to Jew-hatred.

[number6]

50. Random house colledge dictionary

Semite 1. a member of any of various acient and modern peoples
orignating in SW asia among whom are Hebrew and Arab.

[Blitz]

52. I said look up ANTI-semite

Perhaps you didn't understand that. Let's try again.

Look un ANTI-semite. Under "A." Please post your result in this thread.

[durutti]

62. Pointless.

While Arabs are indeed Semite, the term "anti-Semitism" was coined to refer to Jew hatred. While you could make the case that prejudice against Arabs is also a form of "anti-Semitism", arguing that point isn't really conducive to debate.

[Blitz]

49. What do you mean by "here?"

Are you referring to the article or to this thread and, in either case, please cite exactly which phrase or phrases you are referring to which gave you that impression.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Blitz]

53. Kindly

look up the word "including." Please post the results of your research in this thread.

[nomatrix]

54. May I ask what is your opinion of the article?

Since you posted it.
I have read your comments to others who expressed their opinion.

I have never posted an opinion on any threads here on I/P affairs.

My opinion is....
I think attitudes toward yourself and others, have everything to do with where you were raised, who raised you and their opinions, your school, religious upbringing and if you continue to practice it today.

If you were adopted and never knew anything of your genetics, would the religion of your biological parents dictate your prejudice, even though you know nothing of them, and you were raised by someone of a different religion?

When I first looked at your posting, I thought the picture of Lori, was you. When people place icons on their posts it represent something of who they are, or would like to be. That is, on the Internet, like the clothes you wear, the car you drive, the home you live in, your style. Again, by sight, it dictates the information taken in, and processed through all the filters of experiences in your life.

Just my opinion and my experience.

[GabysPoppy]

56. Had your question been limited

to just your subject line, it may have gotten a response.

Your message made a response unnecessary.

Just my opinion and my experience.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Blitz]

66. The subscription is free

Happy reading.

[durutti]

61. I'm not even anti-Israel.

I oppose the occupation and support civil rights for the Palestinian Arabs, including the right of return.

Statehood is irrelevent. I oppose all forms of nationalism.

[Blitz]

64. "I'm not even anti-Israeli"

"I oppose all forms of nationalism."

I seem to have detected a contradiction.

[Fight_n_back]

67. One progressive response might be to ask

"what types of criticism bother you? Is it specific phrases or images? Is it a tone? We certainly want a debate that isn't obscured by misunderstanding"

This would probably make someone less defensive than "Everybody has a perfectly good reason to hate Jews" or "shut up and go away" or "You are using that as an excuse to avoid worshipping at the altar of Nobel Prize winning Yassir Arafat" or whatever passes for progessive respnoses these days.

It is the way I hope I would act if someone told me I was a bigot.