For a man who mewls about his opponents being "free with the insults", Bill seems surprisingly happy to end his posts with bilious and slanderous invective about them; I am, apparently, a "racist", a "Zionist" and a "warmonger". I eagerly await Bill's campaign to drive me and my comrades out of the labour movement - a movement in which people who think the murderous oppressors of the Iranian working-class simply MUST be supported are more than welcome, but in which anyone who entertains the notion that the ambitions of these oppressors to kill Israeli workers might be a source of concern for us have no place at all!
Fortunately, I have a thicker skin than Bill so will let the personal offence slide...
Bill's attempt to justify his repeated lies was an amusing piece of contortion. To justify his repeated lie that the AWL supports immigration controls in Israel, he pulled out a piece of ours explaining why we think the demand for the collective resettlement of millions of people (which is what the demand for "the right of return" amounts to in the heads of the people who politically hegemonise it) is a reactionary fantasy. Not quite the same thing.
Then, to "substantiate" his particularly poisonous lie that the AWL hold the Palestinians in the same regard as US white supremacists held/hold black people, he simply quotes our two-states position. Then, to bridge the yawning gap in logic, he concluded that because (in his view) this position is a fantasy, we *must* be positively in favour of segregation and apartheid and only bang on about all that equality business to "disguise" our real agenda - Israel-Jewish racial supremacy! Quite a trick.
Finally, Bill "substantiates" his claim that we support the occupation of Iraq and positively want the troops to be thereby quoting a piece which includes the following lines; "We are, in general, for getting the US troops out of Iraq. But we believe how that is done - by the sectarian militias, or by a labour or at least democratic movement - is critical." So Bill "proves" the truth of his lie by quoting a passage that contains its opposite idea!
Bill is clearly an expert contortionist. I have no doubt that he will later inform me that it is my fairly to properly grasp dialectics that leads me to view all this as a load of fucking nonsense...