You. Yes, you. The person who doesn't see the problem with what Helen Thomas said. We can admire Helen Thomas for her contributions to journalism for these many years, and we don't know what is actually in her heart, but we do know what she said. She said that all people of a certain ethnicity should be ethnically cleansed from a region of the world.
You don't see the problem with what she said? That is not a highly controversial statement to you? What is the big deal? I've got news: You are not 'anti-Zionist'. You are an anti-Semitic asshole.
---------
You. Yes, you. The person who thinks there are some Jews that are allowed to live in the Middle East and some that aren't, based on their recent linguistic heritage and some misguided ignorant racial theories that your pulled out of your ass. You are not 'anti-Zionist'. You are an anti-Semitic asshole.
Issue 1:
"Oh, but isn't what Helen Thomas saying about Israel just what many people say about Tibet?"
No, Sherlock, it isn't. See, what people (those that have an opinion) say about Tibet is that the Chinese government shouldn't rule over them. That a portion of China should be carved out for an independent country of Tibet. Nobody is saying that people of Han Chinese heritage or descent should be ethnically cleansed from a large portion of the world to become Tibet.
Do you see the difference, and why the later is analogous to what Helen Thomas said and the former isn't? Do you see why someone arguing that all Chinese should be removed from Tibet, or that all Tibetans should be removed from China, or that all Muslims should be removed from Bosnia, or that all blacks should be removed from America, and they should all just go somewhere else, would be viewed as advocating ethnic cleansing? That they would be viewed as having made a racist statement?
I know, when it comes to Jews it's different. That's what makes you an Anti-Semite.
"But" you say, "there are fringe people in Israel that advocate doing just that same thing to Arabs!" But so the fuck what, House? It is wrong and misguided for them to advocate that, and I'm sure you would be the first to call them racists. That is not what we are discussing here. Plus none of them are prominent members of the elite American press establishment.
But when it comes to Jews it's different, right? Sure, whatever.
--------------------------
Issue 2:
"But" you say "some Jews are 'Sephardic'. They belong in the Middle East. I'm ok with them being there. Other Jews are 'Ashkenazi'. They are just poseurs of some sort."
Well, if you think that then you are just pathetically ignorant of history, genetics, linguisitics, culture, statecraft, and pretty much everything else. Ignorant, in fact, to the point that your ignorance must be cultivated, just so that you can dislike Jews some more.
To educate you on the real story of the heritage and history of Jews throughout the world would make this diary too long. For a more thorough explanation, you should read my series on Jewish ethnic history. There you will find all of the evidence you need to educate yourself:
http://www.dailykos.com/...
Suffice to say, if you insist on some cute way to divide Jews up so they fit artificially into some parody of a 50s style American racial paradigm, and use that to justify who is "white" and who isn't, and use that to justify who is allowed to live in the Middle East and who needs to up and leave and go somewhere else, then you are an anti-Semitic asshole. Yes, you.