>> Sorry neoleft but 90% of what u write is just your idiotic

On the other hand, you're 100% consistent with your idiocy.

>> You rarely, if ever source anything. All you do is cut and paste what someone else said and then throw in 2 sentences of your misinformed opinion.

No, I cuit and past, and include the sources.

>> You also claimed to be nuclear engineer and apparently a middle east expert (though you can't speak Arabic or Hebrew) .

Yes I am a nuclear engineer an I never claimed to be a middle east expert, though there is no need to speak Arabic and Hebrew to be one. Not all WWII experts spoke German or French.

>> Oh, not to mention that you accuse anyone of being pro-Israel as being a paid agent of Israel.

I neve accused anyone of beign paid. I certainly don't think anyone would be paying you Amos, it would be a waste of money.

AMOSYARKONI

>> tell me, does your company know that you spend your entire day posting antisemitic and anti-Israel responses on blogs?

No, because I don't spend the entire day posting comments.

>> Neolefts idea of supporting his statements - "It's true because benny morris said so. " Never mind his actual sourcing of his quotes or "facts."

I provided the links you idiot. Don't blame me for your illiteracy.

>> you do spend all day posting on this blog
we can see from the time stamps on your comments.

LOL. It clearly has not occured to your shrapnel addled mind that the time stamps are meaningless unless if someone is not posting from the US.

>> One of the most infamous events of the terror war the Palestinians started in 2000 was the lynching of two Israeli's who got lost in Palestinian-controlled Ramallah on October 2000.

it's only famous because it happened to Israelis. Israel has been killing Palestinians by the thousands for more than 60 years.

>> A Polish and Italian film crew videotaped the lynching.

An American peace activist got crushed by an Israeli bulldozer. Google the number of foreign journalists whot by Israelis forces, or the number fo UN compounds Israel has bombed of shelled.

>> So much for objective and fearless reporting.

Yeah right.

Meanwhile, Ethan Bronner's son was serving in the IDF while he was reporting from Jerusalem and also the BBC has spent 350,000 pounds sterling to fight an order to release a report which exposes their pro Israeli bias.

>> The entire media bought into this lie.

So did Shomon Perex, who was involved in the incident.

>> When the truth came out that only 54 Palestinians were killed and 80% of them were Arab terrorists.

80% were Arab terrorists, according to ISraeli sources of course. that was never verified.

What is laughable about the effort of ISraeli propagandists to trivilize this number is that they are also the first to mention the 1929 massacre in Hebron, where the murder of 65 Jews was considered a Jewish massacre.

>> The Palestinians lynched two Jews and juggled parts of their brains in front of tv cameras but...someone supporting palestinians got crushed by a bulldozer in a war zone...so that makes things even."

No, it just makes the original argument BS.

Sorry that your hypocrisy is being exposed.

Israelis were killing Americans long before 2000.

the design phase. Fuel rods are monitored by nuclear waster management and the nuclear safety departments.

>> Is your salary from the PLO that high?

And to think you were just complaining about being accused of beig a paid Hasbra agent.

>> You love to defend all their actions, even when they blew up state department officials in gaza giving out scholarships to palestinian children.

Israel have murdered UN officials, british troops, US Navy personel and US reporters. While Hamas are clearly thugs, Israelis supporters don't have the moral high grounds.

>> Except that the British troops prevented the Jews from escaping Europe and entering Palestine with their families. 

No British  troops prevented the Jews from escaping Europe.  Jews from escaping Europe were  sing taken to numerous destinations.  Most of them didn't even want to go to Palestine.

No Amos, the Zionist terror groups were attacking the British to drive them out of Palestine.

>>That the British had the white papers - which condemned the Jews to die in Europe.

False. Even Ben Gurion acknowledged that Palestine was too small to address the Jewish predicament. 

>>  And, that's  the British decided they would just hang around in middle east 

Wrong again. They stuck around to facilitate the creation of a Jewish state.  Without the Brits, there would have been no Israel

It just goes to show how ungrateful Zionists are, and how liking they are to turn on those that are not get useful to their messianic ideology.

It's Zionism that  is morally deficient.

The point I made was that most of them didn't want to go to Palestine.

>> The White Paper of 1939 effectively cut off Jewish immigration to Palestine on the eve of the Holocaust.

No, it limited immigration to Palestine, because

The mandate granted Great Britain full powers of administration. Tthe White Paper was in conformity with the mandate. The Palestine High Court of Justice affirmed that in 1946.

The UN Secretariat noted that the question could not be settled without the consent of Great Britain. In its Supplementary Memorandum submitted to UNSCOP, the Palestine Government stated (page 34):

"In organizing illegal immigration into Palestine the Jews have defied the law of Palestine and of other countries from which this traffic has been carried on. It is no answer to this to say that the law is unacceptable or that it is illegal, when it is not. In maintaining the law against these attempts to break it the Administration has been compelled to commit itself to further expenditure of its resources on deportations and the maintenance of camps in Cyprus, costing in 1946 and 1947 a sum that may amount to £3 million."

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/29B6E87D9790D10905256602004F5467

David Ben Gurion self-published a letter he had written in 1937 which explained that the members of the Permanent Mandates Commission had advised the Jewish Agency that the Mandate could not be implemented according to their wishes for a Jewish Commonwealth in all of Palestine. See David Ben-Gurion, "Letters to Paula and the Children", translated by Aubry Hodes, University of Pittsburg Press Edition, 1971, pages 134-135

UNSCOP recommended an international commission be established with representatives of the UN and the Jews and Arabs of Palestine to regulate immigration into the borders of the proposed Jewish state during the first three years of the transition period to safeguard shared natural resources and the rights of the existing inhabitants. It concluded that the European refugees were an international problem and that Palestine could not be considered the answer:

4. While the problem of Jewish immigration is thus closely related to the solution of the Palestine question, it cannot be contemplated that Palestine is to be considered in any sense as a means of solving the problem of world Jewry. In direct and effective opposition to any such suggestion are the twin factors of limited area and resources and vigorous and persistent opposition of the Arab people, who constitute the majority population of the country.

5. For these reasons, no claim to a right of unlimited immigration of Jews into Palestine, irrespective of time, can be entertained. It follows, therefore, that no basis could exist for any anticipation that the Jews now in Palestine might increase their numbers by means of free mass immigration to such extent that they would become the majority population in Palestine.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3

Even Ben Gurion admitted that Palestine was not large enough to accomodate all the Jewish refugees from Europe.

I'm sure Buchanon can write on David Duke's site and write more Pro Hitler articles.

The guy has always had a place to shoot off his mouth. He is now going to FOX news, having always worked in Washington DC. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/18/pat-buchanan-msnbc-hannity-blacklist_n_1286303.html

Somehow, he does not seem to be a victim.

All one has to do is look at who is agreeing with Walt here and what arguments they are putting forth.

We have the usual adherents of "the vast jewish conspiracy" as well as someone who sought fit to rehash the crap that Henry Ford used to sling around in the 20's.

He seems to be a magnet for bigots and morons.

you proclaim a "knee jerk posture" was made elsewhere, not a general assertion. A definition:
knee-jerk? ?[nee-jurk] Show IPA
adjective
1. of or pertaining to a knee-jerk.
2. Informal . reacting according to a certain habitual manner; unthinking: a knee-jerk liberal
, but the specific point made. Here is a paragraph:

Here is a paragraph you are responding to:

"The objection is to Jewish use of the right of free speech, which is deemed oppressive. Letters | email against an article are interest in the article itself, money for the publisher. That's why so many shock jocks are on radio."

Please show me twenty others who have said, with reference to claims of Jewish control of the media, that in fact there was ample space provisioned for all manner of Jew baiting, that the real objection was to the speech on behalf of Jews.

Spood is one giant straw man factory. He simply invents arguments, attributes them to Walt and then attacks them.

There are no adherents of "the vast jewish conspiracy", and indeed Walt has explicitly dissavowed this idea, but that doesn't stop trolls like Spood from pretending otherwise.

>> He seems to be a magnet for bigots and morons.

Which probably explains why Spood, Amos, Gliad and Martial are here.

And you might be interestd to find out that Mossad have also determined that Iran is not producing nuclear wepoans and agrees with the 2007 and 2011 NIE....just as I've been saying.

"The intelligence assessment Israeli officials will present later this week to Dempsey indicates that Iran has not yet decided whether to make a nuclear bomb."

http://tinyurl.com/7u44u8y

>> How do you have time to design nuclear pants or watch the reactors while you are posting over 50 times on this site, on mondoweiss, and other blogs? Methinks you are a liar! :)

You don't think much at all Amos. I am not posting comments from work.

>> Neoleft, a nuclear engineer, a middle east expert (who can't speak, read or write Hebrew or Arabic), and who can't spell or use proper grammar in his postings. Hmm, kind of suspicious.

Not really. I often post from my Iphone, but I don't have time generally to run comments through a spell checker.

>> Also, the Israeli reports do not confirm the data or conclusions in the NIE reports. Nor does the most recent IAEA reports

Yes they do. Of course you wouldn't know, since you haven't read them.

"The intelligence assessment Israeli officials will present later this week to Dempsey indicates that Iran has not yet decided whether to make a nuclear bomb. "

http://tinyurl.com/7u44u8y

That is precisely the same conclusion as the 2007 and 2011 NIE's.

You seem particularly obsessed with my job. Maybe you should spend your time finding one for yourself.

>> Not to mention, I find it humorous you type so many responses here, that are also long...all from your iphone.

Hence my typos.

Do you have a job Amos, or does Israel pay you to work from home?

So I are it you are the wannabe marine under a new name after being banned?

Your comments are becomming increasingly incoherent and disjointed.

MARTIAL

12:00 AM ET

February 20, 2012

No badge of honor, Good Mr/Ms Spood

>> This paragraph in the W|M paper suggests Jews who exercise free speech rights are hazards to our government:

One woudl have to be suffering paranoid delusions, and/or drug abuse to come to that conclusion. Walt is discussin the efforts of the lobby to squelch debate about Israel.

Again Martial, it is obvous that you believe free speech includes the right to suppress the free speech of others. it's entirely consitent with polls that reveal most Israelis believe democracy means the tyrrany of the majority against the minority.

You need serios help my friend.

>> he does however fail to mention any other lobbies ever - as if the oil lobby (arab interests), NRA, Cuban lobby, Irish lobby, never had any affect on US policies.

Please remid us the last time half of Congress, POTUS or SOTUS gave a speech at a convention held by the oil lobby (arab interests), the Cuban lobby, or the Irish lobby?

>> He also never misses a chance to bash-Israel or Jews or anyone who supports the Jewish state.

Only if they deserve it. ;-)

defeat not the argument. All you have done is to make an assertion that contrasts with the conclusion of the argument. You have not defeated the logic behind the argument.

By the by, "anti-Semitic" has no or little meaning to me any more;"Jew baiting" to my eyes is far more lucid. Incarceration ended Michael Vick's dog baiting; disputation can end Prof. Walt's Jew baiting.

and if you are goin gto cut and paste whole excerpts from reports, at lest try to ensure they are current.

It was still 2009 when Obama was 0 months into his term in office.

In any case, Obama inherited 2 wars and was facing hostile relatiisn with the Arab world. His reach out to the Arab word, which was nothing but a PR stunt, was never serious. It certainly was not motivated by any apparent Arab or oil lobby.

>> All you have done is to make an assertion that contrasts with the conclusion of the argument. You have not defeated the logic behind the argument.

No, I pointed out the flaws in your argument and the false conclusions you drew.

>> "Jew baiting" to my eyes is far more lucid. Incarceration ended Michael Vick's dog baiting; disputation can end Prof. Walt's Jew baiting.

Jews can be baited Martial? Sounds like an anti Semitic remark to me, as it implies Jews cannot think rationally, but response to being baited.

But it's you that's having the meltdown.

To resolve matters with respect to Good Mr. Neoleft, we must expand matters so Prof. Walt will fully understand the issue at hand. One should consider the verbal act being referenced the way one used to consider many Chinese menus: one from column A, one from column B, one from column C created a nice meal. Similarly, a relevant sentence would bear one from the set of subjects, one from the set of verbs, & one from the set of objects.
Subject set: the Jew, the jew, the kike, the Israel Lobby, the Jewish Lobby, . . .
Verb set: controls, owns, manipulates, directs, . . .
Object set: the press, the news, the media, the moving pictures, …
Hence, one might say “the Jew controls the press”, “the kike directs the news”, “the Israel Lobby manipulates the media”. Possible variations include “the news is controlled by the Jew”. One could also, of course, change the singular to the plural in many cases, e.g., “the jews direct the news.”
Now for Good Mr. AMOSYARKONI, it is important to understand that implicit is the same as explicit. Thus, when Father Coughlin said, as noted above “Social Justice Magazine, of which Father Coughlin is editorial director, supplements his radio discourses by publishing every week 20 pages of editorial matter giving therein information to a vast reading public—information not available in the daily press”, it is clear he was Jew baiting.
The concept is likely too abstruse for immediate comprehension by a Harvard Professor post tenure acquisition, when the brain begins to soften. Matters might be clarified by 1899 paragraphs (The Literary Digest p 654). Let’s look at them in two parts:
Part 1.
The platform of the antisemitic party of the Reichstag runs in the main as follows:
“1. It is the program of the antisemitic party to spread the deeper knowledge of the real character of the Jewish people. Only the conviction that there is an impassable gulf between the ideas of this race and those of other peoples in intellectual and moral respects can awaken the conviction that the Jews as a race are not capable of participating in the development of modern civilization as integral factors, but that they are essentially hostile to the best interests of national and general culture.
2. The Zionite movement is one of the results of the antisemitic agitation. This new propaganda contains the confession of what has so often been denied, namely, that the Jews are still one nation no matter among what peoples they dwell, and their leading interests are those of the Jews as one people. The ambitions of the Zionites would deserve the recognition and cooperation of other peoples only if the certainty existed that the state to be organized as new Zion would really become the gathering place of all the Jews of the earth, which, cannot, unfortunately, be expected. I would not be lawful or allowable to recognize as a representative of the Jews living among Christian people any external power, nor can the Alliance Israelite be regarded as sovereign or be represented at the Imperial court of Berlin.
3. On account of the excellent modern facilities of intercommunication, it is probable that in the course of the twentieth century the antisemitic question will become a world’s problem, and as such will be decided by all the nations cooperating in this way in such a way that the Jews will be compelled to sever their connection with the existing states. The true peace congress will be that convention which devotes itself to the problem of ridding mankind of the presence of the Hebrews. Until that time, it will be the duty of each individual nation to do the best it can in the matter.
4. One of the first requirements of this propaganda is that the law must determine who is to be regarded legally as a Jew and who not, and that the descent from Jewish stock must determine this question and nothing else. We rejoice that a beginning has been made in this direction by the legislation of 1898 in Berlin.
5. Full statistics of the Jews must be collected, giving exact data as to their numbers, occupations, wealth, etc. Such statistics were extant in Prussia down to 1861, but the Emperor has done little in this matter.
6. The party convention asks of its representatives in Parliament to push legislation on the Jewish question with all vigor, and to test the various parties as to their standing on this important problem.”

_
Breathtaking, is it not? Auschwitz fulfilled a program suggested for decades before Herr Hitler’s ascent. The W | M paper is no call to cull Jews (Mr. Atzmon’s book, by contrast, is); what interests here is the determination that a threat to democracy in America accrues from insufficient public | Congressional discussion of $3B in military aid out of a defense budget of many hundreds of billions of dollars, much of which is a black box.

I have read your post about 3 or 4 times and based on your leaps of logic, incoherent ranblings and irrelevant tangents, that you are suffering some combionation of chronic ADD, autism, and Touretz syndrome.

Prof. Walt will fully understand the issue at hand far better than you ever will, which is why he has written a best selling book and you have not.

>> Subject set: the Jew, the jew, the kike, the Israel Lobby, the Jewish Lobby, . . .

Before you go any further, you should stop to consider that Jabotinsky, Weizmann, Herzl, Ruppin, and Ben Gurion ridiculed ordinary Jews in the Diaspora and used derogatory terms to describe them, like Yid, eunuchs, Orientals, & etc. These were "Zionist people" who claimed they were inventing a "new Jew" and they even attempted to employ eugenics in pursuit of their goals. See for example Etan Blooms dissertation on Arthur Ruppin, the Father of Jewish Settlement in Palestine.

http://www.tau.ac.il/tarbut/tezot/bloom/EtanBloom-PhD-ArthurRuppin.pdf

But in any case, the fact that Professor Walt has used none of these derogatory terms, but you feel the need to do so suggests you are desprately scraping the barrel and building straw men at an alarming rate.

Please seek professional help Martial. Debating you is like havsing a discussion with the love child of Forrest Gump and Rainman.

in your assessment beyond my wildest beliefs. Certain before was your uncovering my being an unemployed man in the Chicago projects posting between swigs of Thunderbird. Now you have diagnosed Tourette’s syndrome, a disorder whose characteristic, although not invariable, verbal feature is unintended speaking of particular words, oft obscene; a fabulous neurologist with this disorder rendered unique the set of conferences he attended. You are a better nuclear engineer than a physician. Like most nuclear engineers you are a brilliant; as is so with the few nuclear engineers that have met me, English may not be your first language. Persons spawned here find reasonable packages of words not traditionally ordered. Languages possess unreasonable features. Invalid would be inferring from the ubiquity of the syllable “fart” that German cuisine influenced the language. One might alter the meaning of the word “tear” simply by pronouncing it differently. “Jew baiter” is an established phrase in English; insulting the phrase makes no more sense than would my female cat’s declaiming “los gatos” sexist. Rest assured reasonable efforts will be expended to clarify points that confuse you; all you need post: “I do not understand how you arrived at conclusion X. Might you explain it?”
Nuclear engineers are likely no more possessed of psychic than of diagnostic skills. Unlikely is your intimate acquaintance with Prof. Walt’s knowledge level or mental status. Your sentences about the use of language of nineteenth century Jews intrigue. A Jewish painter in France used a Jew baiting image for visual argument, thinking it simply a communicative form; his going into hiding during the Dreyfuss affair taught him the error of his ways. Today Mr. Lazare’s text is by Jew baiters beloved.
The point is better made, perhaps, in part II of the quotation:

Part II (again from The Literary Digest p 654):
These propositions are, however, considered too sweeping even by those who do not love the Jew. The Cottbus Neue Kirchen Zeitung, which may be regarded as representatives of Protestant opinion, says:
“It is apparent from these official resolutions that this section of the antisemites are filled with the most unchristian hatred of the Jews. The decisions read like the statements of a Tacitus concerning this people. In fact, they remind the reader of a Haman in the days of Esther. It must, indeed, be acknowledged that the Jews have deserved the hostility of Christian nations in modern times; but nothing can justify such unchristian opposition and methods. Antisemitism began in Germany because Pastor Stoker was compelled to lash the immoral and anti-Christian Jewish press in Berlin, and because in the money markets they were the sharks of modern society. Mommsen, the great historian, called them ‘the disintegrating element’ in modern society. But a solution of the Jewish problem will be found only when it is approached in the spirit of the Saviour, and love and evangelical truth will accomplish what hatred and oppression will never bring about.”
__

“Jewish press” is Jew baiting, even when used to oppose a nefarious proposal; Prof W | M in their paper engaged in Jew baiting by arguing that a set of Jews manipulated the media & that this manipulation was an offense against democracy.

and ad hominems.

It seems you suffer from Amos's inability to read.

>> “Jew baiter” is an established phrase in English

It might be, but like the term, self haiting Jew, it is bereft of meaning.

Unlikely is your intimate acquaintance with Prof. Walt’s knowledge level or mental status.

>> Your sentences about the use of language of nineteenth century Jews intrigue.

First of all, they were not nineteenth century Jews, but 20th century Jews. And rather than intrigue, I suspect they come as a shock to you, not to mention, throwing a major wrench into your argument.

>> Part II (again from The Literary Digest p 654)

Why are you quoteing from The Literary Digest when tryign to make a case against Professor Walt? Isn't it obvious that you are unable to come up with the passages from Professor Walt's book to implicate, which leads you to have to pick irelevant texts and try to atribute them to Walt's ideology?

>> “Jewish press” is Jew baiting, even when used to oppose a nefarious proposal

Perhaps, but the term “Jewish press” appears nowhere in Professor Walt's book.

>> Prof W | M in their paper engaged in Jew baiting by arguing that a set of Jews manipulated the media & that this manipulation was an offense against democracy.

Which proves yet again that you either have never read the book or are simply a liar. There is no argument made that Jews manipulated the medis, but that the lobby seeks to influence it. Those are two entirely different arguments. Nor do they even suggest such activities are an offense against democracy.

I dare say Martial, that you may have just defined a new term. First we have "self hating Jew", and now you're inventing a new phrase - self baiting.

>> History shows general violence against Jews after hatred of the "Jewish Press" is proclaimed.

When was hatred of the Jewish Press proclaimed Martial? BTW. The voices inside your head don't count.

>> smart people can read between the lines, neoleft.

And paranoid people convince themelsves that there are enemies wherever hey look.

>> Just like Walt does not have to say how he hates jews. It is implied based on his near-constant bashing of Israel and those who support it and his denotation of a Jewish- conspiracy of Israel supporters.

Paranoid people are also compulsive liars. They make up lies and ima\ginary scenarios as they go along and make anemies of anyone who disagree with them.

Mondoweiss is not the source of the report. It came from the anti Semitic rag known as the Jerusalem Post.

http://tinyurl.com/74ewlyd

You're great comic relief Amos.

unless the shrapnell already did that. In any case, my mother died nearly a decade ago.

But I take comfort in the fact you are so derranged that you feelforced to make such vile statements about my mother.

I'm sure your own mother would be ver proud.

>> Neoleft, you cant speak arabic, you cant speak hebrew, you have never been to Israel, Iran, Iraq, or anywhere in the middle east

You keep repeating this line, regardless of the fact that I keep telling you that:

1. One does not have to speak arabic or hebrew to understand the politics or history of the region. After all, not all WWII historians speak German or French.

2. I have indeed been to Israel and Iran.

How's the weather in Hebron today?

She was Jewish.

I thought that would make your day.

by any means. For all anyone knows, you might be former Mayor Marion Barry & I might be former Governor Rod Blagojevich. Certain it is that persons with Jewish ancestors, such as Paul of Burgos, can be Jew baiters; one of the worst alive is Mr. Gilad Atzmon, who writes in The Wandering Who chapter "The Right to Elaborate":

p 15 In my work, I also refrain from criticizing Judaism, the religion. Instead I confront different interpretations of the Judaic code. I deal with Jewish Ideology, Jewish identity politics, and the Jewish political discourse. I ask what being a Jew entails. I am searching for the metaphysical, spiritual and socio-political connotations.

__________

Just a bit egotistical. Now consider sentences from his chapter "The Book of Esther":

p 158 The moral of the story is clear. If Jews want to survive, they had better infiltrate the corridors of power. In light of The Book of Esterh, Mordechai & Purim, AIPAC & the notion of 'Jewish power' appears to be an embodiment of a deep Biblical & cultural ideology.

p 159 Both in Exodus & The Book of Esther, the author of the text manages to predict the kind of accusations that would be leveled against Jews for centuries to come, such as power-seeking, tribalism & treachery. Shockingly, the text in Exodus evokes a prophesy of the Nazi Holocaust. It depicts a reality of ethnic cleansing, economic oppressive measures that eventually lead to slave labor camps (Pithom & Raamses). Yet, in both Exodus & the Book of Esther it is the Jews who eventually kill.

p 159 Interestingly, the Book of Esther (in the Hebrew version of the Bible; six chapters were added to the Greek translation) is one of the only two books of the Bible that do not directly mention God (the other is Song of Songs). As in the Holocaust religion, in the Book of Ester it is the Jews who believe in themselves, in their own power, in their uniquness, sophistication, ability to conspire, ability to take over kingdoms, ability to save themselves. The Book of Esther is all about empowerment. It conveys the essence & metaphysics of Jewish power.

________

Such interpretation would be expected from Herr Robert Ley's pen. Surely Prof. Walt can publicly condemn this monstrous text; he might even be able to have Prof. Mearsheimer renounce it. All of us, you know, can reform & become better persons.

address Amos' vile attack on my mother's virtue.

You might have read Aztmon's book (which has nothign to do with Professor Walt) but you either you never read Professor Walt's thesis or you are simply a liar.

>> Surely Prof. Walt can publicly condemn this monstrous text

Why should he? Atzmon's interpretation of the Bible, which is a work of fiction anyway, and Aztmon pours scorn on it. It's clearly not where the substance fo Aztmon's thesis lies.

plugging the book. The harm in the analysis of Esther lies in its characterization of those with a belief in Judaism as deserving government sanction. Because Prof. Walt supported Prof. Mearsheimer, indeed supported him, there is a vital moral question involved. That you did not appreciate this fascinates. Re-read the German Protestant Church's passage that exhibited Jew baiting in its use of Jewish Press. See what it says about the Book of Esther.

endorsement:

Gilad Atzmon has written a fascinating & provocative book on Jewish identity in the modern world. He shows how assimilation & liberalism are making it increasingly difficult for Jews in the Diaspora to maintain a powerful sense of their 'Jewishness.' Panicked Jewish leaders, he argues, have turned to Zionism (blind loyalty to Israel) & scaremongering (the threat of another Holocaust) to keep the tribe united & distinct from the surrounding goyim. As Atzmon's own case demonstrates, this strategy is not working & is causing many Jews great anguish. The Wandering Who? should be widely read by Jews & non-Jews alike.

John J. Mearsheimer is the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago.

The original wandering Jew taunted Jesus on the way to Crucifixion; he was cursed to walk the earth until the Second Coming.

http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/holoprelude/derewigejude.html

A much more interesting origin of Jewish wandering stems from Tertullian, who, in attempting to assist a Christian proselyte after a debate the latter had held against Jewish proselytes, wrote Adversus Judaeus, wherein wandering is punishment for deicide. The notion did not sanction murder, but it helped needy & less than honorable political leaders who could then expel Jews whenever the need to acquire property occurred; this was thus a sanctioned interpretation of the New Testament made real by politics.

The most magnificent civil rights document for Jews in history, Nostre Aetate, released Jews from ancestral guilt. Mr. Atzmon, who believes Mr. Greenspan made the US prosper for reasons other than a desire for prosperity, was surely unaware of the connection between The Wandering Jew & deicide; he simply wanted to display his Nazi credentials.

By contrast, Prof. Mearsheimer likely knows about Tertullian. I do not know Prof. Mearsheimer's faith, but those statements concerning "assimilation" & "liberalism", were they to emerge from the mouth of one claiming to be Catholic, would yield a 25% shot that the person is a Society of St. Paul "Catholic" wishing to overturn Vatican II & Nostre Aetate. That still leaves 75% chance that the two are unconnected, but it raises eyebrows. In any case, Prof. Mearsheimer is more likely a Baptist anyways.

In any case, Prof. Walt should carefully consider this matter. What if Prof. Mearsheimer were to write similar encomiums for Ms. Dillling's THE JEWISH RELIGION?

http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/dcontents.html

Ms. Dilling's analysis lacks the full measure of Mr. Atzmon's effrontery; Instead of assaulting the most important Jewish text, the Old Testament, she damns the Talmud, which not many Jews read extensively. For both authors, putatively bad characteristics Judaism are deemed exhibited in putatively bad characteristics of Jewish persons. One can only imagine what people would say were that construction used today with respect to Catholicism. Our founders knew well that Reformation related religious persecution was bilateral, that is to say that Protestant governments persecuted Catholics & vice versa; that is why the religious test clause was inserted into the constitution itself. One of the truly great features of America is religious tolerance.

endorsement:

Gilad Atzmon has written a fascinating & provocative book on Jewish identity in the modern world. He shows how assimilation & liberalism are making it increasingly difficult for Jews in the Diaspora to maintain a powerful sense of their 'Jewishness.' Panicked Jewish leaders, he argues, have turned to Zionism (blind loyalty to Israel) & scaremongering (the threat of another Holocaust) to keep the tribe united & distinct from the surrounding goyim. As Atzmon's own case demonstrates, this strategy is not working & is causing many Jews great anguish. The Wandering Who? should be widely read by Jews & non-Jews alike.

John J. Mearsheimer is the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago.

The original wandering Jew taunted Jesus on the way to Crucifixion; he was cursed to walk the earth until the Second Coming.

http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/holoprelude/derewigejude.html

A much more interesting origin of Jewish wandering stems from Tertullian, who, in attempting to assist a Christian proselyte after a debate the latter had held against Jewish proselytes, wrote Adversus Judaeus, wherein wandering is punishment for deicide. The notion did not sanction murder, but it helped needy & less than honorable political leaders who could then expel Jews whenever the need to acquire property occurred; this was thus a sanctioned interpretation of the New Testament made real by politics.

The most magnificent civil rights document for Jews in history, Nostre Aetate, released Jews from ancestral guilt. Mr. Atzmon, who believes Mr. Greenspan made the US prosper for reasons other than a desire for prosperity, was surely unaware of the connection between The Wandering Jew & deicide; he simply wanted to display his Nazi credentials.

By contrast, Prof. Mearsheimer likely knows about Tertullian. I do not know Prof. Mearsheimer's faith, but those statements concerning "assimilation" & "liberalism", were they to emerge from the mouth of one claiming to be Catholic, would yield a 25% shot that the person is a Society of St. Paul "Catholic" wishing to overturn Vatican II & Nostre Aetate. That still leaves 75% chance that the two are unconnected, but it raises eyebrows. In any case, Prof. Mearsheimer is more likely a Baptist anyways.

In any case, Prof. Walt should carefully consider this matter. What if Prof. Mearsheimer were to write similar encomiums for Ms. Dillling's THE JEWISH RELIGION?

http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/dcontents.html

Ms. Dilling's analysis lacks the full measure of Mr. Atzmon's effrontery; Instead of assaulting the most important Jewish text, the Old Testament, she damns the Talmud, which not many Jews read extensively. For both authors, putatively bad characteristics Judaism are deemed exhibited in putatively bad characteristics of Jewish persons. One can only imagine what people would say were that construction used today with respect to Catholicism. Our founders knew well that Reformation related religious persecution was bilateral, that is to say that Protestant governments persecuted Catholics & vice versa; that is why the religious test clause was inserted into the constitution itself. One of the truly great features of America is religious tolerance.