On Thu, 17 Dec 1998, Tom Lehman wrote:
> Also, look at Clinton's top level administrators, at least 40% of them
> belong to a tribal/ethnic/religious group that makes up maybe 1 1/2% of
> the American population. This tribal/ethnic/religious minority so over
> represented in the Clinton administration has had thousands of years old
> blood feuds with the tribal/ethnic/religious group who we are bombing.
> Is this smart policy?
Tom, I assume you don't mean it in this way, but this is uncomfortably close to the whole Elders of Zion/international cabal of Jewish bankers thing. I wouldn't trace the current Israeli/Arab fighting to ancient "blood feuds," I'd trace them to the colonial policies of the British. I'm curious, though, why aren't just coming out and saying "Jews." If we rewrite the sentence using Jews, we come up with something like "Jews are grossly overrepresented in Clinton's gov. Jews and Arabs have fought for 1000s of years* Can we trust those Jews to make fair and equitable decisions regarding Iraq?"
As for the suggestion that Jews in the US are so enflamed by love of Israel and hatred of all Arab peoples that they would manipulate the prez. into bombing Iraq--do you see the problem there? Similar comments about people of Japanese descent led to their being imprisoned in camps for WWII.
*Jews and Arabs have *not* been engaged in blood feuds for 1000s of years. There is some legend in the Bible, and then inr ecent history in Israel/Palestine, but much of that is due to the British.
Frances