Daily Kos

View Story | 342 comments

  •  a comment (4.00 / 2)

    As to being tough on Joe -- exactly how are we worse to him than we are to Santorum or many other rightwing Christians?

    Santorum and other rightwing Christians haven't been brought up in this thread.  Joe has been.

    by GoVOTE on Fri Aug 27, 2004 at 07:37:33 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Have never seen you jump into (none / 1)

      the fray on other threads where they are brought up and claim that we are being anti-Christian.

      It's the policies that Joe supports that brings him up whenever the issue is the wrongdoings of  those Neo-Cons who are Jewish and Israel.  This story goes beyond a spy for Israel who resided in the Pentagon and under the direction of Feith and Wolfowitz but also to the heart of one reason we are in Iraq, and Joe is not exactly reticent in speaking about how his support for the invasion included the calculation that he saw it as a way to make Israel.

      I'm sorry you feel that the possibility that Likud was feeding crap to our government to bolster GWB's "case for war" troubles you less than what we may say about a certain Senator.  One who may not even find the activities of Likud and their spy out of line.    

      What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away.

      by Marie on Fri Aug 27, 2004 at 08:17:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  hmmm (4.00 / 2)

        I'm sorry you feel that the possibility that Likud was feeding crap to our government to bolster GWB's "case for war" troubles you less than what we may say about a certain Senator.  One who may not even find the activities of Likud and their spy out of line.  

        I haven't made this statement anywhere.  I do find this whole thing troubling.  I also find it troubling that some posters have leaped to the conclusion that Lieberman is somehow connected with this.  I also object to people "outing" members of the DoD as possibilities for being the spy, when no news agency has outed these names (or brought up Lieberman).

        I find it troubling that you would allow posters to derail this conversation, moving it away from the more troubling aspects of this story, and allow them to make speculations between the spy and prominent Jewish politicians.  Why defend the evokation of the dual loyalties stereotype?

        by GoVOTE on Fri Aug 27, 2004 at 08:40:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  "Outing?" (none / 0)

          We don't have the goods necessary to "out" anybody on this story.  People speculate when all the information is not released -- that's not outing -- and any ten year old could tell the difference between the two.

          Sticking to the very narrow and specific elements to any story and not placing it within its proper larger context misses the forest for the trees.  Sort of like writing Abu Ghraib off as a "few bad apples."

          make speculations between the spy and prominent Jewish politicians  -- only one and only within the larger context.  Don't think anybody here claimed a direct relationship between Joe and the "spy."  

          What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away.

          by Marie on Fri Aug 27, 2004 at 09:09:40 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  actually (4.00 / 2)

            If you scroll above, Richard Perle was named as the spy, to which Lieberman's name was immediately brought up as someone who would defend the spying.  As evidence, another poster followed this by saying that Lieberman said that Americans should be willing to die for Israel.  (Sounds like a bastardized paraphrase to me, though only Clinton was the one who made anything close to that claim when he said he'd get in the trenches to defend Israel.)

            You'll notice that "outing" is in quotes in my post as well.  Hence we are using it with the same skepticism.

            I think these are very serious charges, and I think the speculating can do a lot of harm, especially gratuitous speculation.  No article has mentioned Lieberman's name.  Why are some dkos posters?

            by GoVOTE on Fri Aug 27, 2004 at 09:20:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Because we detest him for enabling (none / 0)

              GWB to take this country to war and didn't even need WMD to get his support for him -- Iraq being geographically close to Israel was enough for him -- and his unquestioning support for everything Israel does.  You may think it's unthinkable that Joe would defend the actions of someone who was spying for Israel, but others don't.  Based on his past statements, it's not a stretch to consider that Joe would defend such a person.  I'm not saying that I think that, but nor do I think he would be out there denouncing such activities and those who put the "spy" up to it.  However, it doesn't bother me if others want to speculate beyond the boundaries of where I would go with this one, and since you can't prove that they are wrong, your objections are nothing more than attempts to stifle free and open exchanges here.  

              (Can't imagine Clinton in the trenches for anyone -- but since I'm not a fan of his, I'm not someone who is going to defend him.)    

              What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away.

              by Marie on Fri Aug 27, 2004 at 11:50:10 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Nobody made the conclusion (4.00 / 2)

          that Joe was involved in this: Lieberman's name was originally brought up in this thread because somebody wondered what he would think (given the background that Marie supplied, Lieberman is on record as saying he supported the Iraq war because he thought it would be good for Israel).

          There has been no post on this thread (outside of yours) that has even remotely suggested that Lieberman was "involved" in the spy issue.  

          Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

          by a gilas girl on Fri Aug 27, 2004 at 09:17:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  you make it sound so innocent (4.00 / 2)

            Above, people say that Lieberman would defend the spy and as evidence, he called Dean an anti-Semite (he did not) and that he said Americans should die for Israel (he did not.)

            In fact, Jonathan Pollard hates Lieberman because he feels that Lieberman should make moves on his behalf.  Lieberman has ignored Pollard and, if there is indeed a spy, I expect the same reaction.

            Bringing up Lieberman's name here is nothing short of evoking the dual loyalties stereotype -- look everyone: let's spread it: Lieberman has more loyalty to Israel than to America.  That's why he criticized Dean, the true American.

            by GoVOTE on Fri Aug 27, 2004 at 09:24:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

View Story | 342 comments