Strawman

Seen it an awful lot lately...

But who's been putting up those straw men? If I understand the concept correctly, your recent frequent accusations of "strawman" arguments are themselves examples of the fallacy.

In this particular instance: Not only have you not provided a source for the quote in this post, you have used it to erect an anti-Semitic strawman that you label "The Left".

Of course I am not saying it is anti-Semitic to disagree with Israeli policy. It's also not anti-semitic to oppose Zionism. It's also not anti-semitic to oppose expansion of Israeli settlements into various occupied lands.

As a Jew who does not support Israeli policy, I'm really glad to hear you say that -- but it leaves me even more confused about where this is coming from. You lashed EPG with it in a manner suggesting that you were calling him anti-Semitic for his well-known mistrust of Israeli internal policy. If, as you say now, that's not your own opinion, what's the point?

That particular flavor of "conspiracy theory", about Israeli foreknowledge of the 9/11 attack on the WTC, arose almost immediately after the attack. As far as I know, no serious analysis of the situation -- including the official Commission report -- gives the theory any credence. <a href="http://www.snopes.com/rumors/rumors.asp#israel>Here is Snopes.com's page on it, and this is Snopes' link from their page to the US State Department on the same false rumor.

It appears (pending verification of your quote) that a small handful of fanatical "conspiracists" with a Xerox machine may still believe in it, but they are hardly "The Left". If your recent posts harping on "anti-Semitism" are meant to ridicule that tiny band of true believers, it'd be a lot less confusing to the rest of us if you just said so.

So, yes, please, spell it out "in long form". Don't just throw rocks -- make a point.