Greg,

What is wrong with what Dean said? He spoke the truth.

You will never find the Iraqi Prime Minister defending Jews. Anti-semitism is too much ingrained in his culture for him to be anything but anti-semitic. His refusal to condemn Hezbollah, while condemning Israel, is a pretty clear indication Dean is correct.

Dean has never been correct about anything in his entire life. He is a very good example of how low the Democrats will go to satisfy their lust for power.

Can anyone tell that Ken is a duplicate of Dean ?

While there is certainly a possibility that Maliki really is anti-Semitic, Howard Dean has no proof that he is and, in his typical Dean fashion, went for as low a blow as possible with nothing to back it up.

To say the least, Maliki is in a difficult political situation in Iraq and certainly could have voiced support for Hezbollah for political reasons rather than personal. This is an unknown. Like in any Arab country in the Middle East, the prevailing view on the street in Iraq is sympathetic towards Hezbollah. Thus, most politicians will probably express sympathies towards Hezbollah in order to please their constituency. Yeah, it sucks. But that's the way it is at the moment and presumably will be for a long time to come.

Anyway, regardless of Maliki's statements, the Iraqi Foreign Minister came out today and said that Iraq would join other Arab states in criticizing Hezbollah. This is encouraging.

But to get to your question, Dean's comments are wrong because they are possibly untrue, they are certainly unhelpful, undiplomatic, and insulting and they reveal that Dean is either (a) incredibly ignorant when it comes to the political situation in Iraq (b) couldn't care less and only cares about scoring political points by smearing our ally in Iraq or (c) both (a) and (b). I'll let you decide.

Greg, I think your bias is showing.

Maliki said:

�The Israeli attacks and airstrikes are completely destroying Lebanon�s infrastructure. I condemn these aggressions and call on the Arab League foreign ministers� meeting in Cairo to take quick action to stop these aggressions. We call on the world to take quick stands to stop the Israeli aggression.�

Anti-semite? If those words had been spoken by a Democratic Senator, everyone on the right would be screaming anti-semite. (Please don't try to deny it... you know you would.)

So what makes it any different when the Prime Minister of Iraq says them?

Like I said in my response to Ken, who knows if Maliki was "triangulating" when he made those remarks. And regardless, The Iraqi government as an entity is doing the right thing now.

Like I said in my post, there are appropriate ways to show one's disagreement with Maliki's statement without throwing around vitriol. But as we have all seen before, that seems to be the only thing Howard Dean is able to do.

Arabs are Semites and most Iraqis are Arabs. It is ignorant to call Arabs anti-Semitic unless they are consumed with self hatred. Howard Dean would have made a great president. Not!

I'll respectfully disagree, Greg. I don't believe that Howard Dean is the one throwing around vitriol.

But then perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps calling the leader of a national political party stupid isn't vitriol.

So when Dean goes to bat for Israel, it is bad. When someone in the GOP does, it is good. I see.

Maliki may very well be an anti-Semite. His statement, however, is not anti-Semitic. It's anti-Israel and, possibly, anti-Zionist. I'm sure he harbors little warm feeling toward Israel as very few Arab Muslims do.

But Dean's statement is raw politics, said to appeal to a certain section of "the base" of the Democratic Party. It might go over well there.

It is, however, utterly careless in terms of foreign relations. That's never stopped a politician, of course. Nothing is more important than "the next election", even if that means there can't be an election after that.

Len and Ken, you are both dumb idiots. You're probably both Glenn Greenwald or crazy Jason Leopold or something. It's nice that the left is totally losing their minds. Please check yourselves into mental hospitals before you do something really stupid.

Ever given any thought to getting into politics, Stankleberry? You'd be perfect for the right wing of the Republican party. You have no argument and no skills at discussion, but you've got terrific insults and smears. Think about it... you'd go far!

Dean is a public figure, and his words carry some responsibilities. This is his form of diplomacy for Iraq. This is the diplomacy of the Democratic party? And they think the President has things screwed up?

When you're at odds with Boxer and Schumer, you need to stop talking, look around, and realize how far out in left field you are.

I gave up on trying to have sane arguments and discussions with insane lefties awhile ago. You're all out of your minds. That's what happens when you force yourself to believe in lies for such a long time. Good luck with that, LenKenGlenn.

The broader question, of course, is whether there's any significant political figure in Iraq who does *not* hate Jews in general and Israel in particular.

I would be a bit surprised if there were enough to crowd a Miata.

That said, Maliki and Hezbollah appear to go way back, as I was discussing with LJD yesterday.

Calling Maliki an anti-Semite is probably an accurate statement. That said, it probably really wasn't very good timing on the part of Howard Dean.

The real problem with Maliki is that he doesn't really govern Iraq even though he is the leader of the "Iraqi government".

The Kurds in the north govern themselves quite well, thank you and they do not even fly the Iraqi flag. The Shia in the south have established their own little Islamic Republic ruled by clerics, and the mixed areas around Baghdad are engaged in a civil war. Maliki has no control over any of this. All he really controls is the Iraqi Army, which is regarded by the Sunni as just another Shiite militia, along with the Mahdi Army and the SCIRI militia, all aligned with Iran.

The plan was to establish a pro-American democracy that would be a friend of Israel and the U.S. That is looking pretty unlikely with the exception of the Kurdistan, which wants no part of Iraq but will be an American ally.

Dean calling somebody else an Anti-Semite? That's rich!!! Somebody post this photo of him wearing the Palestinian kayifa, showing solidarity with suicide bombers and murderers of Israelis young and old.

http://i7.tinypic.com/2148o6d.jpg

And there we have it gang... a confirmation that what Howard Dean is spewing is in fact the mainstream of the Democratic party.

Like what you see, America?

The broader question, of course, is whether thereâ??s any significant political figure in Iraq who does *not* hate Jews in general and Israel in particular.

What's your point- they should be our enemies?

Pretty thin connection to Hezbollah. I went to school with a lot of people who are probably doing things I don;t approve of, but that doesn;t make me complicit in their actions.

Antisemetism is the most abused word these days.You criticise the murderer Olmert you are antisemetic. You ask Israel to stop killing inncent civilions you are anti semetic. Maliki is anti semetic because, the stooge that he is of the neocones, still he crrticises the Israeli atrocities.I think one should be proud to be antisemetic