|
LadyEllen -> RE: Helen Thomas (6/9/2010 12:18:36 PM)
|
I perceive something of a problem with that though V - in that it seems to me, and it might be just my impression, that these comments by Helen Thomas were so readily flavoured by many observers and accepted equally by others as being derived from a bias arising from her own ethnic heritage in a country neighbouring Israel that it should be incredible to think that the same bias should not be present in at least some of Jewish religion in the US, and perhaps even to the extent that any criticism of Israel - and here we may discount Ms Thomas' comments as being a particularly vicious example unsuited to the point - is jumped on and used as far as possible to label the commentator as anti-Semitic.
It cannot be that some US citizens are ascribed bias whilst others may escape such a charge, dependent on which notional foreign loyalty may be ascribed to them. This is itself should raise questions as to the interests of Jewish citizens which are far from helpful either in resisting the ridiculous anti-Semitism that is found from time to time, or in any sensible and reasonable discussion of Israeli policy whether one might support or condemn that policy in whole or in part.
I would argue that such bias, and even divided loyalties in some instances, should be acknowledged as a factor but not necessarily proposed to be - except in instances of demonstrable treason - cause for concern in particular when I would hope we all should wish to hold a sensible and reasonable debate towards the resolution of foreign policy issues and most especially that concerning the Palestinians and Israelis. This will prove impossible if, notwithstanding the prejudices that exist, one man contributing may be disregarded on account of his background without consideration of his contribution whilst the other may be acknowledged and his contribution valued for the same reason and that reason not only overlooked but suppressed.
E
|
|
|
|
