Comment: Response

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Most blocks of Rand/Ron Paul (see in situ)


"Let's face it, the Neo-Con agenda, part of which is to secure Israel..."

Exactly, "Israel." That's the Jewish connection, not the neocon connection. Was RP boo'd for wanting to discontinue aid to neocons or aid to Israel? Was RP banned from participating in the "Republican Neoconservative Coalition" debate or the "Republican Jewish Coalition"? Are the freerepublic people calling Rand a "Neoconservative hater" or a "Jew Hater." (The implication that Rand should be expected to work for Jews (in Israel) as an American senator?)
"Neoconservatism first manifested in the early 1970s. It started among disaffected – mostly Jewish – liberals".

Neoconservatives are disproportionately Jewish. Therefore, Judaism is a noteworthy characteristic of Neoconservativism. Therefore, if Neoconservativism is of concern to you, Judaism would qualify as a Red Flag. If not, then what is a red flag?

You said,

"If you think all or even most Jews support the Neo-Con agenda you are sadly mistaken." (Therefore there is no significant Jewish connection to Rand/Ron blocking.)

Is the same as saying...

"If parents think all or even most strangers will kidnap their kids, then they are sadly mistaken. Therefore they should not tell there kids not to talk to strangers."

"If you think all or even most bankers support the bankrupting of America, then you are sadly mistaken. Therefore bankers are good, and we should look elsewhere for the bad guys."

All I'm saying is that with increased risk comes increased caution. This is just true of life. And no vaccine, industry, weather condition or group of people is above that rule. Take it from Benjamin Freedman and Alan Sabrowski. Both Jews saying the same thing I'm saying. Are they sadly mistaken, as well?

I'm done debating, brother. Good luck to you.