Let's all agree to refer to the Likud Lobby, since that is what it is, and I believe it will be easier for American Jews to criticize, and accept non-Jewish criticism of, the Likud party, than of Israel. It will be easier for non-Jews to criticize it, since the uninformed masses won't even know what Likud is, and when they ask, it can be presented as a minority position within Israeli politics, essentially Israel's Neocons. While when they hear criticism of the Israel Lobby, they might think Anti-Semitism, especially with Professor Dershonance shouting "Bigot," at the top of his lungs.

How would an Israeli agent be in a position to help out a leading Jewish Democrat with a House leadership position? Obviously, she hoped to tap into an even more powerful Zionist network with its tentacles all the way to the top.

Two quotes from the link: “According to the CQ story, Alberto Gonzales, the then- U.S. attorney general, shut down the case because Harman was useful in lobbying on behalf of the administration’s quest for expanded eavesdropping powers.”

And:

“In exchange for Harman’s help, the sources said, the suspected Israeli agent pledged to help lobby Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif., then-House minority leader, to appoint Harman chair of the Intelligence Committee after the 2006 elections, which the Democrats were heavily favored to win.”

So Jewish Zionist Harman is working on behalf of Israel, and working on behalf of the Bush admin’s secret police powers, and working with an Israeli agent who has pull with Nancy Pelosi. The Democrats won in 2006 as a result of a backlash against the Iraq war, which was at least partially engineered by the Israel lobby, and again in 2008 in the same atmosphere. The Republicans are now a minority, but the unelected, unregistered Israel lobby remains.

This should by now be obvious: The two-party regime works hand in glove at the axis of Jewish Zionism, it’s rank with corruption to high heaven, and its got neo-totalitarian designs. And yet average partisan sheeple from both sides still continue to point their fingers at the "opposition" for all that's wrong with American foreign policy. Brilliant.

Welcome to the U.S. Soviet. Looks like all those Americans out there buying guns by the gross aren't the dumb bumpkins the two-party regime zombies like to portray.

The anti-Semitism accusation is going to be shouted no matter what. It’s the only card the corrupt cabal has to play. So why "Likud Lobby"? Because that's got right wing connotations? We both know that the Democrats are pregnant with Jewish Zionist corruption, even more so than the GOP, so that's just another red-herring.

Any Democrats (and Republicans, for that matter) who think this problem can be solved without a massive purging of both parties have their heads in the sand. I guess it comes down to a matter of how grave one believes the Zionist threat to be. And those who don’t want both parties purged obviously don’t really care if the Zionist problem is solved. So they can hardly complain the next time Israel pulls another Gaza, or engineers an Iran war, or worse.

Are Jews rallying around Walt & Mearsheimer and their exposure of the Israel Lobby? No. Are Jews rallying aagainst AIPAC? A lot of progressive Jews are disgusted, are open to J Street, but don't want to attack AIPAC because of its close identification with Israel. We need an enemy to attack and publicize our attacks, without our friends and families thinking we've become Anti-Semites, or self-hating Jews, and that enemy is Likud and the Neocons. I'm not comfortable attacking Zionism, nor Jews in Government, nor Jews in journalism. It's too hard to distinguish from Anti-Semitism. But I'll attack the Neocons, and the Likud Party, as inconsistent with American values, and Jews who disagree with their policies ought to be comfortable attacking them as inconsistent with Jewish values. Zionism can reform itself. Israel can reform itself. American Jews can throw out the Neocons. And we need to do it fast before another Gaza, and before Iran is attacked.

Then you've already lost the battle, because you've allowed the Zionists to conflate Judaism and Zionism. Shades of Zionism make no difference to hard-core Zionists; to them, an attack on Likud, or Kadima, or Labor, is an attack on Israel.

But there is nothing inconsistent about supporting the concept of a Jewish state and also kicking the Israel lobby's ass, lock, stock and barrel, in America. You just have to start thinking of Israel in the same way that most Americans think of Iran, which is to say that it has the right to exist as an Islamic state, but it doesn't have the right engineer Islamic spying rings and operations by utilizing Iranian Americans and their money as operatives, on behalf of an Islamist agenda.

The reason so many Americans are perplexed by this issue is because so many of them are Zionists, including a lot of non-Jews. But even though I have some Christian Zionist relatives, I have no problem calling them out as anti-American, and putting them under the gun, because I see the larger picture and they don’t. I’m not going to be dragged down to their level by their own ignorance and lack of patriotism, nor by what I view as their theological heresy. In fact, in my view, all three of those moral failures DEMAND their rebuke and punishment, and I’m not fulfilling my moral duty nor my patriotic duty as an American by sparing them.

But you have to be willing to burn bridges on this issue, and as far as I can tell, most Jews and most Democrats and Republicans don't have the guts to do this.

I disagree with this. Jews tend to say what they want about whomever they wish, and call themsleves verbally gifted for doing so. What do Gentiles gain from silence? We're called stupid. The term anti-Semitism means nothing to me, since I see plenty of examples of Jews not cutting WASPs slack for real or imagined sins, mostly of the past. Jews largely set themselves apart from, and at odds with, the rest of the nation on a large number of issues. Why give them a free ride when their group interests clash with, and harm, the majority?