Only you when you persist in distorting history.
It doesn't reflect well on the substance of your arguments that you feel they need a personal attack on your opponent's sanity affixed for good measure as a matter of course.
I gave you substance as well. The smear and substance work hand in hand this time. Sure looks good on you.
I've never held myself out as an expert on the history of Israel. That's why I've consistently been interested in honest discussion of that history (as on the Political Murder thread) as well as the tenets of Judaism which some Jews do and some Jews don't believe comports with a man-made (as opposed to Messiah ordained) State of Israel.
Seems to me that if every criticism of Israel is going to be deemed anti-semitic (save those criticisms expressed by Jews), the defining quality here is whether or not that critcism is offered IN LIGHT OF Judaic law and tradition.
Time and again, I've evinced my respect and love for Judaism. I've no anti-semitism to speak of.
What I do abhor, however, is the masquerading under "Judaism" of strictly secular sorts, Soviet- or fascist-supported terrorists and atheists. I cannot reconcile clearly immoral acts as somehow condoned simply by virtue of their being perpetrated by the State of Israel or her actors.
Mine is not a Nazi take on "Jewishness" as defined by some admixture of the blood in a man's veins but, rather, his obedience to the Jewish faith. Is there something wrong with that?
We had a nice little discussion the other night about Catholics in the same vein. Many will claim they are "Catholic" even if they support, have procured or assisted to procure an abortion and therefore have obtained a latae sententiae excommunication and are NOT Catholic by letter of Catholic canon law.
Do you see the difference here?