Replies

He was long an editor for National Review.
True. And Bill Buckley asked him to leave because Sobran was a rascist.

. Regarding your charge of anti-semitism, I think Sobran writes that it used to be that an anti-semite was someone who hated Jews, whereas in his experience an anti-semite appears to be someone whom some Jews hate.

Of course he would. He is trying to belittle the charge.

From what I've seen of the debate, neither side is blameless. Sobran likes to provoke his detractors, but his detractors also seem to play fast and loose with character assassination.
Not in this case.
1. Sobran speaks at Holocaust Revisionist Events with deniers.
2. He slanders all Jew by calling us commubnists and blaming us for the crimes of the communists. In so doing, he is picking up a line of the Russian, Ukranian, and Polish Communist parties who scapegoated Jews as an official policy.

3. SObran has lied about Jewish law adn ritual practices and has recycled old anti-Semetic charges about the Talmud. (Some of this goeas back to the Middle Ages).
4. Sobran supports all western countries and nationalisms except Israel and Zionism.

If he is not an anti-Semite, who the hell is?

"If he is not an anti-Semite, who the hell is?"

Ummm...Osama bin Laden? ;-)

Seriously, I don't know very much about Joe Sobran. Most things I've read--by him, not about him--I've like. But he throws around "Zionist" too much, in my opinion. (The "Wall Street Journal?")

Here is an opinion piece that he wrote about his presentation to a "Holocaust Revisionist" group:

http://www.ihr.org/conference/14thconf/sobranconf.html

The opinion piece seems gennnnnerally reasonable to me.

1) I particularly agree that Israel has been a "costly" ally. (Though I'm not sure I would go all the way to "treacherous."

2) The "Dual loyalty would be an improvement!" is over the top...at least based on the Jews I know personally.

Overall, I think he makes many good points...some of which are obscured by his rhetoric.