Hermann is charging Israel with crimes against humanity without basis. This isn't just wrong, it is slanderous - and it is driven by hatred of the State of Israel.
I would guess one could make a case against the Israeli government for "crimes against humanity" for the Lebanon 82 stuff, perhaps some before and after. I genuinely don't know. I don't think the mere fact of criticisms at that level renders the charger an anti-semite. Remember, we are only talking about that post of Hermann's. I don't know his work so can't argue one way or the other about it.
I thought you would be familiar by now with the common signs in leftist (anti-war, anti-globo, etc) marches: Zionism=Racism or Zionism=Nazism. The latter formulation is very popular in Europe, where it lets the marchers feel absolved of any lingering guilt for the Holocaust. Zionism never = nationalism, of course, because nationalism is a GOOD THING, while colonialism, racism and Nazism are of course BAD THINGS.
I've seen the signs but I thought we were talking about SI posts, not about protest signs. Are you changing the subject?
As for the original post from Scott in which he offers a quick summary of the bin Laden tape then his own views, I agree with Ken's first response. It's easy enough to tell the point in the post at which Scott moves from a summary of bin Laden into his own views. Perhaps he should have made it clearer but you genuinely have to be looking for trouble to not see the transition.
I repeat an offer I've made several times before. If you and Paul and Ken and Bill and anyone else wishes to work, seriously, on criteria for content limits, then I'm happy to join in. My time is a little more pressed right now but in a couple of weeks it will be a bit freer.
Without that, the stuff you are complaining about is no more objectionable, perhaps even less so, than the constant refrain of anti-European bigotry, anti-leftist bigotry that passes for punditry in many FADG posts. |
