there were no gusanos in Florida?
Michael, you can't be serious.
And in reference to your previous question (I believe), here's a couple of characteristic quotes from Blankfort:
http://mondoweiss.net/2010/01/chomskyabunimah-the-left-and-zionism.html
"(1) US policy since the days of Nixon , Chomsky’s opinion to the contrary not withstanding, has been to find a way to end the Israeli occupation of the land it captured in 1967, not for the benefit of those countries whose land Israel occupied or for the Palestinians but because a regional settlement would produce stability in a area that is crucial to what is perceived in Washington to be in the best interests of the United States. The evidence for this, not only in the national media but in declassified White House and State Departments documents available in the National Archives, is overwhelming as it is for the successful actions of the pro-Israel Lobby over the years in trying to prevent any such settlement. As Uri Avnery asked, rhetorically, in Ha’aretz in 1991, “”What happened to all those nice plans? Israel’s governments have mobilized the collective power of US Jewry – which dominates Congress and the media to a large degree – against them. Faced by this vigorous opposition, all the presidents, great and small, football players and movie stars – folded one after another.”
Not wishing to expend political capital challenging the Jewish establishment, Nixon withdrew support from the first ot those proposed by Secretary of State William Rogers, with his National Security Adviser, Henry Kissinger contributing to the sabotage. Every single president since then who has tried to get Israel to withdraw has been publicly humiliated at the hands of whoever happened to be prime minister and Obama is but the latest and he has experienced it almost every week. Yet Chomsky would have us believe, offering not a shred of evidence, that the US really supports Israeli settlements and its continuing occupation of the West Bank.
Does anyone, not terminally addicted to his brand of Kool-Aid (Chomsky’s not Obama’s) actually believe that one US president after another would allow themselves to be publicly humiliated in such a manner in order to cover their secret report for Israel’s expansionist policy? Obviously not, yet Chomsky persists in peddling the line that it is the US, not Israel, that is the most responsible party in blocking a “peace agreement,” irrespective of its contents." and ..... Twenty years ago, during the first intifada, everything was moving the Palestinians’ way and the supporting coverage though both editorials and cartoons in the US press would be unimaginable today. What they were not able to conquer of even penetrate, of course, was the US Congress which then, as now, was totally in thrall to Israel, which, thanks to Chomsky and the Chomskyites throughout the movement, went unnoticed and untouched as a target of the kind of political action that should have been obligatory. The lesson is this: Until and unless, those who claim to be in solidarity with the Palestinian people are ready to take on Israel’s supporters in Congress and the Jewish organizations and individuals that are responsible for that support, there will be no justice for Palestine. This should not be a subject for internet debate since what we are talking about is not an academic exercise but a people’s struggle for liberation. It’s long past time to separate those who are serious in their support for Palestinian rights and those who, whatever their motivations, have been actively subverting it. As for linking that struggle with finding the truth about 9-11, as much as I question the official narrative, I also question adding that subject to that of the Palestinians which is already difficult enough. As with the assassinations of JFK, Malcolm X, RFK, and MLK Jr., (which may have been the most significant of all), we can never expect to learn the truth. The Palestinians have no such option.