I think Jackmanii covered this in post 319 just fine.
Indeed yes, the story of how brave, plucky little AIPAC, with but a few paltry millions of dollars, has somehow managed stand against the massive juggernaut of anti-Israeli publicity and policy manipulation. Its near miraculous, really, like how Israel has managed to stand firm against the Palestinian military machine with but a few armored divisions.
Brave, brave, brave, Sir Reuben…
Gotcha.
So we can complain about AIPAC (for example) and their supporters and those in government who appear to be influenced by them, as long as we remain sufficiently specific to avoid the appearance of blowing dog whistles. I could sign up to that.
Perhaps you can take a swag at explaining that to Elucidator 
When a message needs so much lobbying, so much money and so much attention from Congressmen and Senators that would be a sign that the message has a problem.
You are welcome to oppose it if it suits you. You are not welcome to do so using anti-semitic tropes while expecting to not be called on it. Fair enough?
Besides, Congress deals with issues far bigger by any measure than this routinely. do the messages surrounding those issues have problems merely because of their size? If so, where do you draw the line as to whne an issue gets so big to one group, it must be abandoned?
What are you really trying to say here? What general principle are you espousing, and how would it apply generally, outside of this particular issue? Give us something other than the perception of anti-semtism. Are there web sites you could refer us to that describe these principles and applications thoughtfully? Or are they entirely your own?
Are you calling me anti-semite???
IIRC the aforementioned J Street PAC is a response to the more hardline approach of AIPAC. They are pro-Israel but their focus is on a peaceful resolution to the Israel-Palestine conflict rather than the “Support Israel, right or wrong” approach. A quick glance at J Street’s page suggests that they target the Democratic side of the aisle pretty much exclusively, which is not that surprising.
I see. What we might do, then, is compile a list of pro-Palestinian statements and positions taken by American political leaders and media spokesmen, and thereby expose the huge anti-Israel imbalance? I suppose, for a start, we could compare the relative budgetary power of AIPAC and the most prominent pro-Palestinian lobbying groups.
Which would be who, exactly?
As usual, newcomer is equal parts dishonest and plain stupid. It was pointed out that Fisk is a 9/11 Truther, due to his babbling about “unanswered questions” and how “steel can’t melt due to kerosene fires” and “so why did building 7 really collapse and collapse into its own footprint”, and so on.
Newcomer’s response was that, no, Fisk was not a Truther. Because, underlining mine:
Perhaps newcomer is really stupid enough to think that most people aer totally unfamiliar with the Just Asking Questions style of 9/11 Trooferism. What am I saying, of course newcomer is that stupid. He’s also a conspiracy nut who thinks that Mossad had anything to do with 9/11.
And this, again, shows just how painfully stupid newcomer’s tiny little mind is. He’s convinced that Israel said “no” to offers made by the PA, even though negotiations were still ongoing up to the point where Abbas unilaterally suspended them, three separate times. I really believe that newcomer is dumb enough that he thinks there is some sort of dishonesty inherent in pointing out that the actual facts why negotiations stopped. as it is somehow unfair since they get in the way of his beliefs.
Or maybe he’s stupid enough to think that in negotiations as complicated as the I-P issue, that one side makes an issue on a few particulars and rather than hammering out the fine points and a series of proposals and counter-proposals, the other side just goes “Ayup, where do we sign?” Maybe he thinks that high stakes negotiations are like a one hour TV drama, and once the dramatic reveal happens in act III, you have some tension in act IV before everything is finally and predictably wrapped up just after the last commercial break and before American Gladiators comes on.
Again, newcomer is possibly one of the dumbest fucks we’ve got here. The truth isn’t to be revealed by a sober analysis of the facts, putting everything in context and chronological sequence. No, the facts are just “pseudocomplexity” that’s designed to, cruelly, attempt to get him to part from his narrative which he knows is the truth. And if there’s any doubt of the truthiness of his narrative, why, the number of pundits who agree is the defining factor.
P.S. The idiocy he’s evinced even in this thread is positively nifty. First he accuses Libby of being an Israeli agent in name if not in deed, outing Plame in order to cover up justifications for the Iraq war (evidently newcomer is also Just Asking Questions about Israel’s involvement in that, too). Then, naturally, when he’s called out on how that’s a profoundly stupid conspiracy theory, all of a sudden Libby wasn’t really serving as an Israeli cat’s paw or actual agent when it came to Iraq but, naturally, just to I-P negotiations where the rest of the American government was totally duped by a masterful deception, organized by a guy named Scooter. Why, they didn’t even realize that his negotiating position wasn’t one that they’d authorized. Or maybe the administration just said “ya know what Scooter, just do whatever you want, we don’t normally give our negotiators instructions anyways.”
Newcomer is a perfect mascot for the coterie-of-fools who rally to this subject.
I’m calling you really, really, really stupid.
Does that count?
No, I don’t really have enough evidence surrounding you to form an opinion.
What I am saying is that anti-semite or not, if you, I , or anyone else uses well known tropes of rhetoric that are known to be used to express anti-semitic ideas by others, you, I or anyone else should expect to be called on it.
Once so called, if you, I or anyone else can not or will not restate the case without using well known or even novel anti-semtic rhetoric, having been given a fair chance to do so, then it would be approaching time to decide.
I haven’t been following your part of the thread closely enough to say what if any parts of this apply to you personally.
WAG though, the first part of it applies and you are saying your logic is not the same as other anti-semitic logic at all, is that where you are at, or you realize it is having had it pointed out, and are in the process of restating it? Is that a good guess? I base my guess mainly because that is how the thread has gone for others so far.
On the face of it, that seems fine to me. It doesn’t seem to imply any issues about dual loyalty for either individuals or broad groups, be they Jewish people accused of dual loyalty to Israel, or Americans Jewish or not who are interested in the Palestinian cause.
As to who Palestinian lobbyists are, I am the wrong person to ask. I honestly don’t know any of the specific lobby groups such as, but not only, AIPAC mentioned in the thread either.
If you feel your cause would be better served by better fundraising, then that seems like a fine place to apply efforts. I made precisely that point to a then 30-something Ivy League graduate degree educated Palestinian born Palestinian American woman about 10 years ago, because someone like her might actually be a good lightening rod for fundraising. At the time she didn’t think it was important enough to even consider. Lost track of her since, so I don’t know the outcome.
But in general healthy debate over foreign policy is fine in my book, while repeating anti-semitic tropes does not qualify as healthy debate. I understand there is an imbalance, there are lots of reasons for that. My advice to pro-Palestinians would be to build their side up, rather than focus on tearing the other side down with anti-semitic tropes, because in the end, that is presuming an anti-semtic audience if you want them to be receptive to your ideas. Even if you find that and succeed, the end result may not be as pleasant as you wish.
Were I you, I’d start fundraising with some positive type PR instead of focusing on negative. Sure, Americans can be roused by negative campaigns in the short term, but that fury won’t last find what is good in the world for Palestinians and build on that and share that would be my advice. Good luck!
All I’m asking is to find where I said that Mossad is behind 9/11. I didn`t. Double-dare to find it.
Today I posted an article from NY Times on Olmert`s book. Nothing on your proposition that peace talks failed due to Abbas suspension. Triple-dare to find it.
On the 3rd item, the quote from Jack Straw is in relation to P-I peace talks. Even clarified that once I realized some people may mix it up. And here you are, again mind you, reading something that was never written.
Quadruple-dare to have decency and do not re-state poster`s opinions.
For the Mods: is that punishable on the Dope? Well, guess not - this guys is still around.
Don’t worry, Elucidator is just engaging in his standard clowning. Either he’s utterly ignorant about US politics and just wanted to set up an ever-so-funny punchline (quite likely) or he knows he’s wrong and is trying to his ever-so-funny yucksterism to cover up the fact that he doesn’t have an actual argument. Generally, if called out on the facts and logic, Elucidator can retreat to ‘argument via jokes’ or shrivel up like any other slug when exposed to pure salt.
The lobbying forces on behalf of the Palestinian cause include but are not limited to international forces like the Saudis and OPEC, and national forces like the NAAA and ARAMCO. For fuck’s sake, the last time the US directly aided Israel in a war, OPEC responded with the oil embargo of 1973.
Whether or not forces like the Saudis, ARAMCO, OPEC, etc… have been effective or how their financing matches up are separate issues, but of course they exist. Someone who pretends to be at all knowledgeable about the situation but then claims that there isn’t a Palestinian lobby is, to put it mildly, being less than honest about one of the two claims.
Already cited, quoted, and underlined it.
My lord you are just adorably incompetent and charmingly dense when it comes to trying to disguise your Just Asking Qustions about the 9/11-Mossad-Connection.
Yes. exactly like how you were Just Asking Questions about the Mossad’s involvement in 9/11. You silly conspiracy nut, you.
I still like your impotent flailing about how, sure, the fact show that negotiations were ongoing until Abbas suspended them (on three separate occasions) but that doesn’t match with your worldview, so it must be false somehow. It’s clear that you don’t have the native intelligence that God gave your average house cat, but it’s adorable to see you try so hard.
I think I’m going to have a few t-shirts with “Mossad” on them printed up for my friends and me, and then we’ll go hang around burning things so we can high-five.
Agree to disagree 
That’s your argument to persuade others? To say you simply have no rebuttal to offer?
So noted.
Maybe now you can focus on my response to your question as to whether you were being called an anti-semite before it scrolls away?
Give it up, compañero!..though with girly pads on.
I’ve had an epiphany of sorts that allows me to read the salient parts of the Walls Of Text© (now coming at you in stereo – The SDMB, gives you more for less) and have come to a conclusion. Read on.
Turns out The Foamers are correct and those of us attempting to counter their cogent arguments, are indeed, BIG TIME bigoted anti-Semites – plus the occasional self-hater. Now now, settle down cow punch, for I’m about to share my epiphany.
See, we’re not just bigoted anti-Semites, but “bigoted anti” a myriad of things. For instance – obviously I can only speak for myself here – I happen to be a fully accredited, bigoted anti-Vaticaner, idem End Of Day nutters, Neocons, radical Muslims and many more I’m still sorting out. Whole lotta hating going on – just wish that all those groups had markers such as the lavish Catholic robes, Muslim turbans, Jewish beanies and so forth. It’d make my hating so much easier.
:::sigh:::
That said, I’m still not convinced we’re “trolls & liars.” Then again, perhaps in a page or ten, that’ll will come to me as well.
I’ll be sure to let you know.
PS-Please ignore my sig.
This is one of the stupidest piece of shit woe is me efforts I have ever seen.
On the plus side, you did throw in a few more anti-Semitic tropes, for good will I guess, so that you won’t be misunderstood by your true audience.
Boy, I sure got lucky on that one! I was thinking that FinnAgainandAgainandAgain was gonna crush me beneath his patented Wall of Text, outlining in detail the massive expenditures of the Palestinian lobby which dwarfs the brave, plucky AIPAC. And like how they made it seem like a visit by a band of Israeli Boy Scouts, striving for their international relations merit badges, how they made it look like an assault by Israeli commandos on unarmed civilians! Sneaky devils, those Palestinians! Especially when they are determined to smuggle in weapons-grade spices, and mobile rocket launchers disguised as “wheelchairs”.
But no, he showed restraint and forbearance, and simply fell back on a line of personal abuse. Not that he didn’t have the facts right at his fingertips, nosir! He was just too nice a guy.
I mean, really, Finn…OPEC? Is that a sign of desperation or cognitive impairment?