For anyone who might be curious as to what I said that he twisted into a charge of anti-Semitism, here is a link to my original post on it, again.
The use of a charge of anti-semitism has, in the hands of such people as Alan Dershowitz, the neo-cons, the Israel lobby and such insignificant figures as Simels, has become absurd. Its absurdity is such that many of those who the charge has been made against are Jews such as Noam Chomsky, Norman Finklestein, Tony Kushner, Howard Zinn, Tony Judt and Adrienne Rich and any one who is at all critical of the actions of the Israeli state and military, including some Israelis. It's not my business to protect the integrity of the accusation but I know it can't be used as it has been for the past several decades and retain its credibility when actually needed.
What I said is that I regretted that either Jews hadn't been admitted into the United States as citizens during the period when there were legal quotas restricting their immigration instead of left to die in Europe, or that the United States MY OWN COUNTRY, hadn't donated land so a Jewish homeland could be placed on North America, where the liklihood of it being in a constant state of war, with all of the deaths, all of the waste of resources on the military, all of the enablement of fascist politicians for the last six decades and counting was far less likely. Really, wishing your country would give up territory for the establishment of a secure Jewish Homeland is anti-Semitism. Imagine that as the definition of anti-Semitism. If that's anti-Semitism, what is wanting Israel to be a sitting duck and in a constant state of war and under threat of attack? Israel has been in a state of war since its creation and that is unlikely to change any time in the foreseeable future. I regretted that a Jewish homeland couldn't have been established under conditions where it was more likely to be at peace or that Jews hadn't been allowed to become citizens of the United States, such as Steve Simels and almost everyone who has been libeling liberals as anti-Semites have been for their entire lives.
The dishonest use of the term by such liars has taken an important word and weakened it into a meaningless epithet to be flung around whenever someone of low character, such as the above, wants to use it. Duncan Black obviously doesn't care that his blog is used by people like Steve Simels for that purpose, even as he also sponsors many, actual, way over the line anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish comments, including those made by one of Simels' friends as documented at the link above.
I don't think people who are lied about are under any obligation to ignore it, so I don't. Lying has become endemic in the age when bloggers figure the court ruling exempting them from responsibility for lies defaming people, libeling people etc. relived them of any responsibility for what they post and their commentators, as well, figure they can lie with impunity. I don't think anything like a decent society can tolerate that situation, democracy certainly can't be sustained on a regime of lying. If that's the rule for the alleged leftist blogosphere, it may as well be FOX "news" and hate talk radio. As it is, I've been told that that ruling only applies to bloggers who don't moderate comments. That category, I'm also told, likely doesn't cover Black's blog because he bans people, such as myself, from answering the lies his regular commentators post there. I'm no lawyer, just someone who is lied about, at least several times most weeks for years, on Duncan Black's blog. I don't know how far I'm willing to go to stop it but I'm not going to let it continue without pointing out the people who are lying about me, directly and indirectly.
Update: First, I'm not "bringing down Eschaton", Duncan Black did that when he gave up actually writing content for it and he stopped doing that years ago. Eschaton was significant, to some extent, before 2008, since then, not much at all.
Second, I really do think that Dershowitz and Simels are using the same tactic. Of course, I'm not especially significant and Dershowitz, unlike Simels, has some intellectual resources so it's a question of kind and not of magnitude. Being a daily reader of The Boston Globe and, especially, of anything by or concerning Howard Zinn (he was on the same Democracy Now program and another person targeted by Dershowitz) and Noam Chomsky, two of my favorite intellectuals and with whom I have had some major disagreements. I remember the second incident that Chomsky talks about here, quite well.
I'll point out that I wasn't even critical of Israel in my comments, all I did was point out that it was a dangerous place for Jews to live.