Your post only makes sense if you completely ignore the historical invention and use of the term “anti-Semite”.
The term was invented by a racist German philosopher named Wilhelm Mahler who specifically coined the term to refer to Jews whom he hated not Arabs, whom he didn’t.
He was trying to create a “scientific” rationale for Judeophobia.
You base your objection on a very minor point and then yawn over the major point here, which is that an AIPAC operative has set up a systematic campaign to smear people who don’t fall in line with AIPAC’s vision of proper views on Israel as “anti-Semites.” I do not know if there is an argument to be made here except that it is a despicable, disgusting enterprise. Plus, I’d like us to stay out of a war with Iran if we possibly can, and the indication is, AIPAC would like to see one happen. After seeing the way the Bush Admin. was led around by the nose by neocons, I’d hate to see the same thing happen to the Obama Admin. wrt AIPAC.
Is your ignorance willful or just risible?
No, anti-Semitism means hatred of Jewish people. Attempting to play on some sort of technicality whereby there is a semitic language grouping is uber weaksauce. Anybody with a quarter of a clue knows not to try to obfuscate the issue by claiming that, anti-semitism means anything other than hatred of Jews.
Once again, no, that’s not what the word means, because it was invented to mean something else, something that only applies to Jews. (And defines “Jews” broadly, and by heredity, not faith.)
I implied no such thing. I said neocons, an entirely different group, specifically the neocons associate with the Project for A New American Century, led the Bush Admin. around by the nose wrt to the war with Iraq (granted, Rumsfeld and Cheney were members of PNAC, so they were kinda leading themselves by the nose). AIPAC is the official lobbying group for Israel, an entirely different group. I didn’t like the war with Iraq, I don’t like the prospect for a war with Iran.
“The term anti-Semitic has been used on occasion to include bigotry against other Semitic-language peoples such as Arabs, but such usage is not widely accepted.”
“Not widely” and “not usable as” are not the same thing. Besides, humor, get some.
His post didn’t imply anything of the sort. He said neocons led Bush to the Iraq war, and that he’d hate for the AIPAC to similarly lead Obama to an Iran war, not that the AIPAC were the same neocons that led Bush into war.
ETA: Never mind, I see he already defended himself
The idea that bribes from AIPAC are the reason for the US Congress’s (stupid, damaging, and long past its welcome) support for Israel simply isn’t true, so it’s legitimate to ask whether the image of the Jew in the shadows damaging his host country’s interests with his bags of gold just miiiiight be a teeeeensy bit anti-Semitic.
These posts look mostly like threadshitting.
If you don’t want to participate in the thread, then don’t post to it rather than making off-the-wall nonsense posts that try to play semantic games or rehash old Woody Allen jokes.
As to “getting humor,” none was presented to “get.”