Kotodama, thanks for the comment. I’m glad you’ve felt free to disagree with me. I don’t want to hijack my own blog with a very long discussion, but let me respond to a few of your points.

1. You write that you don’t get “upset or vaguely frightened” about this sort of thing. That’s okay, but I can assure you that this map, with the addresses of Jewish institutions and the names of officers and trustees, has the full attention of the Jewish community in Boston, particularly among people like me whose children are students at the school on the list.
2. You’re 100% right about the danger of right-wing antisemitism. Everyone agrees about that. But I don’t agree with “whataboutism.” I’ve spent plenty of time and energy in Jewish organizations working on the problem of right-wing antisemitism, but when a left-wing group is antisemitic, we need to be able to say so without addressing the other kinds of antisemitism that are out there. To your question why I’ve taken the time to write about this and not about other instances of antisemitism, I’ll say that this one hits much closer to home than the other incidents I mentioned, because it is aimed at my local community. I have, though, written about antisemitism on the right, for example here, as well as about other kinds of prejudice from the right, for example, anti-Muslim bias.
3. Of course criticism of the Israeli government and its policies is fine. Neither criticism of Israel nor criticism of the idea of Zionism, though, explains why one would include run-of-the-mill Jewish charities that aid the disabled, or Jewish day schools, or the the Synagogue Council, unless what you’re really saying is that the problem isn’t the Israeli government or political Zionism, but the Jews, wielding their pernicious influence behind the scenes, which is precisely what the website does. And it seems to me that if you think J Street is a pernicious agent of Jewish influence, as the anonymous authors do, then you are committed to the destruction of the Jewish state, which, again, is, to me, beyond the pale.
4. I hold a lot of views that are probably not that popular, so I don’t take any issue with you taking a minority view here. But I think it’s a good idea, when you are taking an unpopular view, just to consider whether, in fact, “everybody’s wrong but me,” or whether you might have overlooked something. Here, I think you should consider that the condemnation of this website has come from everyone from Ayanna Pressley to the ADL. If you think Ayanna Presley is wrong to say that the website unacceptably targets Jews, that’s fine, but just be cognizant of the very wide spectrum of people who disagree with you here.

Always happy to have your comments!

Second. Is it seriously your position that nobody is allowed to criticize Israeli gov’t policy without risking being labeled an antisemite? If so, that’s quite absurd. Because presumably at least some of *Israel’s own citizens* do go around criticizing their own gov’t on occasion. Does that make them all raging antisemites too? Oh, and back in the good old US of A, criticizing a foreign gov’t’s policies is core protected First Amendment activity last I checked. That would include—although I’m in no way shape or form comparing this group to WBC—demonstrating about those policies on public land, as held in Phelps v. Snyder almost unanimously save a single Justice (or “Justice” in Alito’s case). (PS I am not a First Amendment absolutist either.)

Third. You reel off a list of recent antisemitic incidents. Four of them are specifically identified, so I’ll address those. Certainly, those incidents were horrific. Nobody disputes that. But listing them is also a complete non-sequitur. That’s because non of them had anything to do with this group—or similar kinds of groups—whatsoever. The Colleyville gunman was a single, disturbed individual. Likewise in the Boston incident. And the Poway shooter was a neo-Nazi claiming superiority of the “European race”. Likewise the Pittsburgh shooter, another RW extremist. That’s quite different don’t you agree? So, you don’t do your credibility any favors bringing up totally unrelated incidents. Or people would read this post and think you’re unable to distinguish between mere protesting/demonstrating and mass murder. You don’t want that, right? Anyway, if you’re actually serious about taking steps to prevent these kinds of incidents—and I of course hope you are—the solution is so painfully obvious I shouldn’t even need to mention it: *gun control*. *Tons* of gun control.

Fourth. Relatedly, you damage your credibility further and forfeit any semblance of seriousness when you harp over nonevents like this one and utterly ignore the *actual antisemitism going on in plain sight*. The latest example being that lovely human specimen, Carl Paladino. Recall he was previously a *major* party—the *Republican* party—candidate for governor in NY, which of course is the *fourth largest* state in the country. Oh, and he got 33% of the vote, so you do the math on how many people seem to like his thinking. Paladino’s also running for Congress now. Oh, and he’s endorsed by Elise Stefanik, who just happens to be *chair of the House Republican Conference*. Funny, it seems like not a week or so goes by without some Republican politician or candidate gushing over how downright groovy Hitler was—always totally unprompted of course. And we can hardly forget Dotard complimenting the neo-Nazis in Charlottesville as “very fine people”. But yet I don’t see you asking for “indulgence” to discuss any concerns on this blog whenever that happens. So, I have to conclude you think it’s all just fine and dandy. (To be clear, I don’t presume to dictate what you write about here. I’m just pointing out the obvious disparity.) And if you think Republicans are the “good guys” because they “support Israel” then remember this: (1) it’s only because the RW Christians want to hasten the Rapture, when—and this is kind of a key point!—Jews will be converted; and (2) more Jews moving to Israel means (like, duh!) *fewer* in the US. And, circling back to my third and previous point, Republicans are of course all about “teh gunz”.

And, for the record (I’ve probably said it before though), I am a fellow member of the tribe. But you’ll forgive me if I don’t get “upset[] or vaguely frighten[ed]” about this kind of imaginary antisemitism. That’s because I’m too busy worrying about the real thing. Also, four important points in closing: (1) I have nothing to do with this group, in fact, TIL they even exist; (2) I don’t necessarily agree with their aims; and (3) even if I did agree, I don’t necessarily think their means are a particularly effective way of accomplishing them; but (4) I’m perfectly capable of separating such opinions about them from whether I think they’re antisemitic—and if tomorrow they jumped on the “Hitler sure was a swell dude” bandwagon, well, then, I’d be first in line to denounce them.

Thanks for the comment, Robin!

Thanks, Eddie, for the comment! These particular antisemites are not the ones who describe themselves as “patriots.” They’re the other ones, the ones who describe themselves as opposed to the state and to mainstream institutions.

Thanks for the comment, Alexander. I do not think your answer is the right one, as the American Jewish community, while it faces threats and challenges, is strong, vibrant, and worth preserving and fighting for.