On Aug 18, 2005, at 8:51 AM, Horn, John wrote:
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In a message dated 8/16/2005 11:32:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
An honest question: had Sheehan not used the words "to benefit
Israel" in the first sentence or "not Israel" in the second,
would
this still be anti-semitic? The still flows without those
words, I
believe.
You are correct. if she just blamed the neocons it would not
have been
anti-semitic but she brought Israal and the neoncons into
this. By the way quick
name one christian neo-con intellectual.
Prior to this thread I would have said "George Bush, Dick Chenney
and Donald Rumsfeld". But that would be because I had no idea what
the *official* definition of "neo-con" actually was. I wonder if
Cindy Sheehan thought the same...
You still don't, actually -- you have only the word of one person, who
clearly isn't capable of balanced discourse on the topic.
--
Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books
http://books.nightwares.com/
Current work in progress "The Seven-Year Mirror"
http://www.nightwares.com/books/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
