[Zionist Conspirator]

I think your post comes closest to what a Paleo is, except for your insistance that Sobran, Reese, and Buchanon are Israel-haters. When the Cold War Ended, Israel ceased to be a strategic asset to the U.S., and when the Paleo crew pointed this out, they were viciouslyattacked by the neo-conservatives, many of whom were jewish. Most Paleos have a major distrust if not outright hatred towards what they interpret as a globalist, pro-Israel, interventionist agenda put forth by the neo-cons. They suspect this interventionist policy of the neo-cons is nothing more than a transparent attempt to keep the U.S. overly involved in the Middle East for the benefit of Israel.

Excuse me, O Unbelieving One, but you must be about two years old. My little crusade against people like you grows directly out of my experience with rightwing groups during the Cold War, when my simple little Bible Belt beliefs were shaken to their foundation by what I discovered.

Your implication that "paleos" merely began criticizing Israel when the Cold War ended is false and disengenuous. I was a member of a rightwing organization during the height of the Cold War, and the Right Wing was rabidly anti-Israel throughout the course of that conflict. This was at the same time that it was rabidly interventionist in every other case. They wanted us to support Rhodesia. They wanted us to support South Africa. They wanted us to support Somoza. They wanted us to support Taiwan. They were interventionist and national-security oriented to a fault, but they made one exception: they did not want to intervene on behalf of Israel because they didn't like Israel.

Any perusal of far right publications and literature during the Cold War era will illustrate the truth of my words and your own disingenuousness.

Furthermore, you illustrate well the arbitrary nature of your own prejudices when you call support for Israel "globalist." Support for Israel against its enemies is no more inherently "globalist" than is support for Taiwan against Communist China, as you are well aware. Your arbitrary classification of pro-Israelism as globalist as opposed to (for example) support of Taiwan outs you completely.

This is the guy who thinks Fundamentalists are "stooges," right?

Bet you don't say that to them when you need them to march in anti-abortion protests with you. Assuming you're even against abortion in the first place.

[muleboy]

And then you ruin it by calling jimmydean a two year old.

U.S. support for Israel is inherently Globalist. Israel is on the other side of the globe. Globalists created the modern state of Israel. U.S. supports Israel often in contradiction to it's own self-interest.

Well, it was good while it lasted.

[Architect]

Support for Israel against its enemies is no more inherently "globalist" than is support for Taiwan against Communist China

True. But what exactly it is your point? That paleos support the Taiwan adventure? I don't think so. If some commentators in "far right" magazines have been known to argue against support for Israel and other commentators argue in favor of support for Taiwan, this merely shows the tension between the America First and the anti-communism factions of the American right.

It has nothing to do with anti-semitism, a current of thought which was always negligible in the US and which was thoroughly eradicated after the second world war. The fact that we here discussing ultramontagne conservatism, a French movement whose only North American influence was in Quebec, simply proves that home-grown anti-semitism is impossible to find. We are therefore obliged to import the "conservatism" of others to find examples. What's more the examples in question are 60-70 years years old. Today anti-semitism is non-existant in France too.

So just lay off. OK?