What's in the water in Southern Mass?

-
Once again, there seems to be an angry response about Israel related issues in South Coast Today. Now let me first say that I understand these angry voices do not represent the majority of great people in Southern Mass. However, the regularity with which they come out in the paper begs two questions:

1) Why does the paper print these minority views with regularity - when they clearly are not representative and when they are clearly damaging the community discourse?

2) Why is that the people who are making the noise are so convinced that Israel is the devil and that any support for her or defense of her actions is immoral?

The latest response is a great case in point for much of what is wrong with this discourse. In the Op Ed "Today's issue is Palestinian rights, not past suffering" Thomas Shire ironically ends up talking very much about past suffering and really doesn't deal very much at all with Palestinian rights. http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090323/OPINION/903230301

He also takes a few common jabs that are two of my litmus tests for someone who is just not credible. To be fair, these two issues are topics that NEED to be discussed in Jewish, Muslim, and Christian circles. They need to be discussed because so many people don't even know how ridiculous they are.

1) The idea that any time a Jewish person brings up the Holocaust when someone else thinks the issue is the Palestinians, they are one more of "those Jews who talk too much about the Holocaust." As I pointed out in a previous post, the current issue IS so often about the Holocaust because so many comments and critiques of Israel have DEEP roots in the myths and stereotypes about Jewish people. More important is that the same Jewish person who yearns for a Palestinian state can be absolutely right about a criticism of Israel taps into that long history of anti-Jewish sentiment. The problem is that people who are not sensitized to that long History don't even see the connection. The other problem is that many Jews (and non Jews) are.

2) The idea that one can never use the word anti-Semitism because the literal meaning of Semite is someone from the Middle East is absurd and I am embarrassed for Mr. Shire for having joined those who would use the argument. It is UNIVERSALLY accepted that anti-Semitsm is the term used for anti-Jewish sentiment. Any argument otherwise is a red herring that simply seeks to discredit anyone who ever claims anything is anti-Semitic. Now except for the fact that anti-Semitism does exist (anti-Jewish sentiments) I would never use the word again. Its just got too much baggage it just rarely is a positive for the person using it. But much like the word Liberal, and Zionism, it is a shame that the agenda of others has so corrupted a genuine and useful word.

But getting back the original point - the title that is, the real absurdity of this article is that Mr. Shire actually thinks he can compare the isolated acts of the JDL with the historical threat that is Arab Muslim extremism. In fact that was the main thrust of my last post - that you simply cannot compare the genuine fear created by the extremists of today's Arab world and frankly anything else in History. But again, I would prefer not to compare anger and hostilities of the past which is exactly what Mr. Shire did. But the JDL? Is that the best you could come up with?