This appeared in the New York Times this week:
Diplomats and ministers from Israel and the Israel lobby have been working Congress, while officials from Arab Gulf states have been telling the Obama administration directly the same message: how much they oppose the proposed deal that Secretary of State John Kerry and the foreign ministers of France, Britain, Russia, China and Germany have drafted to trade limited sanctions relief in return for Iran starting to roll back its nuclear program. Never have I seen Israel and America’s core Arab allies working more in concert to stymie a major foreign policy initiative of a sitting U.S. president, and never have I seen more lawmakers — Democrats and Republicans — more willing to take Israel’s side against their own president’s. I’m certain this comes less from any careful consideration of the facts and more from a growing tendency by many American lawmakers to do whatever the Israel lobby asks them to do in order to garner Jewish votes and campaign donations.
That was Tom Friedman''s writing.
Do only Jews make donations?
Do only Jews influence Congress?
Why the slight difference in what Arabs and Jews, or do not?
Tom Friedman is not expressing in any way, shape or form anti-Semitic opinions, correct?
And this section:
...the deal is expected to freeze all of Iran’s nuclear bomb-making technologies, roll back some of them and put in place an unprecedented, intrusive inspection regime, while maintaining all the key oil sanctions so Iran will still be hurting aplenty. This way Iran can’t “build a bomb and talk” at the same time (the way Israel builds more settlements while it negotiates with Palestinians).
That isn''t an unfair, incorrect and disproportionate anti-Israel view, is it?
Reminds me of the song "Tom, Tom":-
"all the tune that he could play Was ''over the hills and far away'';"
Alll that Tom Friedman can "play" is the anti-Israel card.