# Finn Again's Wake **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 18, 2010, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923 "2010-03-18T19:10:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 40
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/781 "2010-04-14T04:40:53Z")
Just in: [**Obama: Israel should sign NPT**](http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3875661,00.html) Sure as hell the US of A has an uppity President. I mean, how _dare_ he demand such a thing from _Israel_? I’m simply outraged, don’t know about you. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/782 "2010-04-14T04:53:29Z")
Rahm. Emanuel. You accused him of being a traitor to his home for no other reason that that he’s a Jew and you’re a racist. If you deny this, explain why you even included him on the list in the first place. Then we can touch on some others, but he’s by far the easiest example that proves that you were just hunting for any Jews in politics so you could accuse them of Dual Loyalty. Show how I’m wrong, at least try to point out anything about Emanuel’s behavior leads you to accuse him of treachery, or admit that you’re just a racist who’s willing to slander any Jew as a traitor because you have a problem with Jews. Go for it. Make your case against Emanuel. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/783 "2010-04-14T05:03:22Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > I must confess, you got me there, **Finnie**. With apologies to Emanuel… > > [**Far-rightists call Rahm Emanuel a traitor to the Jewish people**](http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1144699.html) > > So tell us, do you think he is? Asked and answered. But not not, in turn, by you. Color me not surprised. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 5:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/784 "2010-04-14T05:17:00Z")
So by “asked and answered”, you mean you do admit that you had absolutely no valid reason to slander the man, and you’re a racist who accused him of treachery simply because he’s a Jew whose name you happened to remember? Just so we’re on the same page. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/785 "2010-04-14T06:02:43Z")
While I’m at it, you shrugged off your slander of Tenet with a joke and then tried to change the subject (shocka!) but how did a non-Jew end up on your list of Traitor Jews? What criteria, exactly, are you using other than whether or not they’re in politics and you think they’re a Jew? Nor was your apology for accidentally slandering the man, but for accidentally calling him a Jew. Funny, that. Let’s look at a few others, shall we? -Michael Chertoff, he’s a Jew. Now why don’t you explain why you accused him of treachery in service of a foreign power? -Eric Lynn, Obama’s liaison to the Jewish community who helped sell Obama’s policies and now a political adviser. Identify why you accused him of treachery in service of a foreign power. -Lee Feinstein, worked on the Non-Proliferation Project, worked as a political advisor. Why did you accuse him of being a traitor, or did his last name just ‘sound Jewish’ to you? -David Axelrod, a political strategist and one of the chief architects of Obama’s campaign. Why did you accuse him of being a traitor, or was it just another case of you remembering someone whose name sounded Jewish to you? -Elliot Abrams, he committed the (grave) of serving as an advisor during the US’ handling of the Israel-Hezbollah war of 2006. Is this just an example of you finding any Jew whose political opinions might disagree with your, and using classic anti-Semitic slurs to tarnish his reputation? -Kenneth Adelman, same deal, a guy whose politics you disagree with (I guess supporting the Iraq War and then saying that it was a horrible mistake) so you get a bit racist on his ass? -David Frum, yet another guy who you have political disagreements with, so you think it’s okay to use racist filth to slander him as a traitor? Just curious, and to be honest I’d like to use you as an object lesson about the insidiously pedestrian nature of modern anti-Semitism. I’ll also be using your fellow travelers in this thread as object lessons as well. Let’s see how many have the courage to call you out for your behavior, and how many are willing to turn a blind eye to racism as long as the racist is using that sludge to rail against Israel or Traitorous Jewish Control of The United States. So either support your insinuations, or admit that the facts come second to your racism. Either way, should be fun. (Or, I guess, try to change the subject with another link to something that you’re angry with Israel about) ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/786 "2010-04-14T06:03:12Z")
Stop dancing, **Finn Wannabe Ali**. My response leaves no room for revision hard as you try. Is Emauel, as alleged per supplied link, a “traitor” to Israel or not? Stop skirting your response. Apropos of nothing, even if French, I really enjoyed the first two Emmanuelle movies. Did you? * * * Trying to carry a conversation with a deranged person is not easy. Wonder if that’s enough to claim “victim status.”? Not that I want it of course, as this whole exchange is rather entertaining. And no skin off my back I might add. As for “being on the same page,” sure, when kosher pigs fly. Back to you,\*\* FrothAgain\*\*. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/787 "2010-04-14T06:31:36Z")
There’s no need for ‘revision’. You accused someone of being a traitor simply because he was a Jew who happened to be in politics. You’ve slandered quite a few other people who are Jews (or who at least have Jewish sounding names) as traitors for no other reason than that factor. What’s so complicated? It’s not like it’s hard to figure out why you’d do such a thing. Like I said, I didn’t expect you to grow a pair and defend your accusations or explain how you made quite so many ‘mistakes’, but I will happily use you as an object lesson. Call it “an internet toughguy racist in his natural habitat (while scurrying)” Now we just see if any of your fellow travelers have enough integrity to point out that your brand of racism is disgusting and should not be tolerated by people of good character. I’m thinking we’ll hear crickets, but hey, one or two may surprise me. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/788 "2010-04-14T07:09:18Z")
So, when are you two kids gonna tie the knot, eh? ---
**Author:** ![wmfellows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c2a13f/32.png) [@wmfellows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wmfellows)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/789 "2010-04-14T11:46:13Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > The English came to Ireland as invaders, imposing their domination over pre-existing Irish nationalit(ies); There was no “pre-existing nationalities” - nationality is a 19th century concept. There were Irish, ‘Old English’ Anglo Norman, and Danish principalities over a hodge podge of Irish and Anglo-Norman populations. > [@](#): > > the Turks did not impose their domination over a pre-existing Palestinian nationality - Neither did the English over the Irish, as the very idea would not exist for several hundred years. Catholic versus Protestant however is rather more relevant. Religious identity. > [@](#): > > Palestine was always a multi-ethnic mix, there was no real nationalism prior to the practically simultaneous development of Zionism and Arabic nationalism towards the end of the 19th beginning of the 20th century. As any other geography one cares to look at in the world. The false contrast between supposed Irish nationalities and the Palestinian case is hard to understand as relevant except in a subtle effort to deny legitimacy to the later. > [@](#): > > In short, there appears less injustice in applying Turkish laws to Palestine, then in applying English laws in Ireland. That entirely missed the point… ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/790 "2010-04-14T12:25:42Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Oh, don’t be silly, of course assholes have friends! They even breed! Where did you think little baby lawyers came from, hmmm? **Rand Rover**? ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/791 "2010-04-14T12:31:56Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > Just in: > > [**Obama: Israel should sign NPT**](http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3875661,00.html) > > Sure as hell the US of A has an uppity President. I mean, how _dare_ he demand such a thing from _Israel_? > > I’m simply outraged, don’t know about you. Why is Israel’s “alleged” nuclear weapons stockpile a taboo subject? Can anyone answer that? Its like everyone knows they have them but nobody ever wants to talk about it and Israel doesn’t admit to it. Its very strange. If Obama refused to talk about Israel’s nuclear program, if Israel doesn’t admit to having one, then why would Obama call on them to sign the NPT? ---
**Author:** ![wmfellows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c2a13f/32.png) [@wmfellows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wmfellows)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/792 "2010-04-14T13:30:32Z")
Probably pointless but > [@FinnAgain](#): > > What did it actually posit was the land ownership of Palestinians? [48.5%](http://www.palestineremembered.com/download/VillageStatistics/4-The%20Land%20And%20Its%20Ownership/Page-019.jpg) Actually that cite indicates that as of 1945, 48.5% as owned, and 40.16% unassigned / non cultivated. It also cites 85% of cultivatable lands as being in Arab hands. Odd the 2nd one wasn’t mentioned, but nevertheless. In any case, the figures are from two different dates, and different focus. Apples and oranges. Now as to Spoke’s aside regarding the Irish case, his whole point was drawing a comparison between the exploitation of an occupier of the vagaries of law, to disenfranchise with legal fig-leaf. The English crown did so in Ireland, Frothy sets forth this argument in perfect step with the legalisic rationalisation of what is very simply expropriation exploiting the weaknesses of traditional style land holding (as generally the case in colonial rule of the European empires where one wanted to get hands on valuable land): > [@](#): > > Further, it does not identify what of that 48.5% (not the 90+ that you have invented) was Mulk. … Musha lands, therefore, had no legal force under the governing body. Funny, when one reads development literature nowadays regarding emerging markets, a lot of emphasis is put on dead capital and the positive impact of accounting for traditional land holding forms, and helping to convert those into legally recognizable title. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/793 "2010-04-14T14:02:04Z")
> [@wmfellows](#): > > There was no “pre-existing nationalities” - nationality is a 19th century concept. > > There were Irish, ‘Old English’ Anglo Norman, and Danish principalities over a hodge podge of Irish and Anglo-Norman populations. Certainly, ethno-nationalism was a 19th century concept. However, equally certainly, those who inhabited Ireland (mostly Catholic) considered themselves occupied and oppressed by those who considered themselves “English” (mostly Protestant) - because there were pre-existing polities belonging to the former that were invaded by the latter. Hence, such fine traditional tunes as [Éamonn an Chnoic - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89amonn_an_Chnoic) 🙂 > [@](#): > > Neither did the English over the Irish, as the very idea would not exist for several hundred years. > > Catholic versus Protestant however is rather more relevant. Religious identity. Again, a distinction without a difference for this argument. There is no doubt that there was one group, identifiable as a community, that felt oppressed by another, invading group who dispossesed them _by force_. I dispute that the 'idea" of a distinction between the English and the Irish did not exist prior to the late 19th century rise of ethno-nationalism. That would have been a surprise I think to Oliver Cromwell. Fact is that they spoke different languages, had a different heritage, and in most cases a different religion. The English had been invading Ireland since at least Elizabethan times … This was entirely unlike the relationship between Palestinian Arabs and Turks. > [@](#): > > As any other geography one cares to look at in the world. > > The false contrast between supposed Irish nationalities and the Palestinian case is hard to understand as relevant except in a subtle effort to deny legitimacy to the later. The “contrast” is between the history of how Potestant Anglo-Irish ended up in Ireland and how the Jewish Israelis ended up in Israel. My point is that the history of the two is quite unlike in all the ways that matter - Jews immigrated at first quite legitimately to what was then a province of the Ottoman Empire, and _purchased_ the land they settled on. Your objection appears to be, as best as I can understand it, that this process wasn’t really legitimate because it disregarded pre-existing Palestinian rights because the laws were skewed against the Palestinians - analogous to the settlement of the Anglo-Irish in Ireland. The “contrast” here is in the identity of the occupying power and its relationship with the communities in issue. In Ireland, the “occupying power” was English and thus the ‘rules’ of land ownership etc. were naturally skewed in favour of _Anglo_ settlers and against the _non-Anglo_ native inhabitants, who were subdued by military force. In Palestine, the "occupying power’ was Turkish, and had absolutely no interest whatsoever is favouring Jews over Arabs. Their system of land ownership, in short, did not have the _colonial_ implications that are the very subject of the analogy in the first place. > [@](#): > > That entirely missed the point… On the contrary: what exactly was the point of the Irish analogy? If I’ve missed it in my summary above, or mis-stated it, please eludicate. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/794 "2010-04-14T14:36:31Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > On the contrary: what exactly was the point of the Irish analogy? The modern-day West Bank, and Israeli government-supported “settlements” there. Did you really not get that, or are you just as strenuous an evader as the target of the OP? ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/795 "2010-04-14T14:44:09Z")
The point of the Irish analogy in my eyes, is that if the English had tried bombing and bulldozing them into submission, our conflict would still be ongoing. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/796 "2010-04-14T14:54:23Z")
Instead of exporting them, or making self-exile necessary simply to support themselves, you mean? ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/797 "2010-04-14T15:16:47Z")
I was no supporter of the English involvement with NI either, but I’m still sure we showed more restraint than the Israeli’s have towards Palestinians. ---
**Author:** ![wmfellows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c2a13f/32.png) [@wmfellows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wmfellows)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/798 "2010-04-14T16:20:01Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Certainly, ethno-nationalism was a 19th century concept. However, equally certainly, those who inhabited Ireland (mostly Catholic) considered themselves occupied and oppressed by those who considered themselves “English” (mostly Protestant) - because there were pre-existing polities belonging to the former that were invaded by the latter. You called them nationalities. Irish as Irish national identity emerged rather later. Of course some of the Irish were ‘Old English’ Anglo Normans who were also Catholic, and while considering themselves “English” also opposed the New English. Therewas not a “nationality” but tribal and non-national feudal states (the Anglo Normans, Danes, & Irish all in a mix). > [@](#): > > Again, a distinction without a difference for this argument. There is no doubt that there was one group, identifiable as a community, that felt oppressed by another, invading group who dispossesed them _by force_. Without a difference? Bollocks. The “identifiable” community was not a community - again the case of the Old English opposition to the New English. It was multiple communities. No different than the case of the Palestinians. > [@](#): > > This was entirely unlike the relationship between Palestinian Arabs and Turks. Yes, but then that’s not the bloody point that Spoke was making nor the argument. > [@](#): > > The “contrast” is between the history of how Potestant Anglo-Irish ended up in Ireland and how the Jewish Israelis ended up in Israel. My point is that the history of the two is quite unlike in all the ways that matter - Jews immigrated at first quite legitimately to what was then a province of the Ottoman Empire, and _purchased_ the land they settled on. Your objection appears to be, as best as I can understand it, that this process wasn’t really legitimate because it disregarded pre-existing Palestinian rights because the laws were skewed against the Palestinians - analogous to the settlement of the Anglo-Irish in Ireland. First, this was Spoke’s argument, I simply have elaborated on the logic. He was rather obviously - to everyone but you and Frothy - not focused on the Ottoman period, but on the Mandate and Post Mandate period. Going on about the Ottoman period is besides the point. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > The modern-day West Bank, and Israeli government-supported “settlements” there. > > Did you really not get that, or are you just as strenuous an evader as the target of the OP? I would think, whether one likes the analogy or not - and I find myself defending an analogy I am not entirely sure about out of sheer frustration at it being misrepresented, but I can easily see the logic of it - that it should be clear enough. I understood at least right out. It should not genuinely confuse someone who is not seeking confusion. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/799 "2010-04-14T16:51:38Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > The modern-day West Bank, and Israeli government-supported “settlements” there. > > Did you really not get that, or are you just as strenuous an evader as the target of the OP? Spoke’s analogy didn’t have anything to do with Israeli settlements in the West Bank, though. His analogy was being used to challenge Jewish land ownership in Mandate Palestine. He wasn’t saying that Jews don’t have legitimacy in the West Bank; he was saying that Jews don’t have legitimacy in Israel. From the post setting up the analogy (bolding mine) > [@FinnAgain](#): > > Likewise, the land codes clearly stated that one only gained temporary rights on Miri land, and then only by continuous cultivation of it. Leaving the land and/or not cultivating it would have voided the claimant’s temporary title to the use of that land (which was never a title of ownership in any case, but use). **This is part of why obfuscatory talk of “Palestinian land” harms honest discussion, it does not enhance it. More egregious examples, like Red Fury’s earlier lie that 90% of the territory in Palestine was owned by Palestinians, aim at distorting the issue irrevocably via falsehood and fiction.** As do Elvis’ repeated claims that somehow all the West Bank is “Palestinian land” even though it wasn’t, not under any of the sovereign powers who controlled it. > [@spoke-](#): > > Right, and back in the day, the bulk of Ireland really wasn’t Irish land because, you know, English landlords and all. It was English land of course. **And if the English landlords had sold it to Jews looking to set up their own state, why, the Irish would have had no grounds for complaint, right?** He’s making the analogy explicit. The Jewish settlements in Israel/Mandate Palestine were bought by Jews from the landlords who owned the land. Honestly, if all the people in this thread were saying was that Israel should pull out of the west bank, I don’t think it would be a big deal. But that’s not what people are saying. **Spoke-** is saying that the Jews who first settled in Israel didn’t have the right to buy the land, **wmfellows** is saying that the Palestinian Mandate didn’t have any intention of setting up an Israeli state, and **Redfury** is saying that Palestinians owned 90% the country that’s now Israel, and that Israel stole that land from them. This isn’t the Israeli right to the West Bank that’s being argued about, it’s the Israeli right to Israel. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923/800 "2010-04-14T16:57:58Z")
> [@wmfellows](#): > > First, this was Spoke’s argument, I simply have elaborated on the logic. > He was rather obviously - to everyone but you and Frothy - not focused on the Ottoman period, but on the Mandate and Post Mandate period. Going on about the Ottoman period is besides the point. > > I would think, whether one likes the analogy or not - and I find myself defending an analogy I am not entirely sure about out of sheer frustration at it being misrepresented, but I can easily see the logic of it - that it should be clear enough. I understood at least right out. It should not genuinely confuse someone who is not seeking confusion. Wait a cotton picken’ second. I was the one asking what point was being argued, remember? You guys (meaning you and **Elvis** ) are now pointing out two wholly different time-periods (the Mandate and post-Mandate periods in your case, and “The modern-day West Bank, and Israeli government-supported “settlements” there” in the case of **Elvis** ) and you are both saying that this is “obviously” or “clearly enough” the period under discussion. Both of you meanwhile are claiming I’m “seeking confusion” (in your case) or “as strenuous an evader as the target of the OP” (in the case of **Elvis** ). Yet you two do not agree between yourselves on the time-period I should “obviously” have known the argument was about. Incedentally, here is what **Spoke** replied when I asked _what the Irish analogy argument was about_: > [@](#): > > Finn seemed to be arguing that mere occupation of Palestine by Palestinians didn’t give the Palestinians any nationalist claim because they never technically owned the land. > > Which seems to me somewhat analogous to claiming that once the Irish were reduced to mere tenancy in Ireland (while the land was technically owned by English landlords), it was really no longer Ireland. If the Irish didn’t own the land, long term occupancy gives them no nationalist claim, right? Seems not unreasonable to me that the issue was the original settlement of what is now Israel by Jewish Israelis. However, if that is not the issue, I can hardly be faulted for that - I’ve asked _twice_ now, and as I’ve said, you two don’t even agree with _each other_. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923.md?page=39) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/finn-agains-wake/532923.md?page=41)