UK readers, I would prefer this debate with Thomas Keyes’ remain within the Rebuttals section.  I’ve tried to take it there several times, yet he continues to post his Israeli attacks here on the main page.  I’m forced to rebut to the same audience.

As I described in a recent article, when debating some people one risks facing an argument based on conspiracy theories and vague innuendo.  I expressed how the gaps in evidence found in these specious arguments are ignored by their purporters, and how obvious, logical explanations for the events are dismissed as lies constructed and supported by supposed vast cabals.  Thomas Keyes presents just this challenge today in his article.

First, I congratulate Thomas for rescinding his undocumented quotation from me and the inaccurate “pseudo-intellectual” label he placed on me.  In return, I will simply repeat the praise of his intellect I’ve made on this site many times – Thomas is undoubtedly a wise and learned man.  And I will rescind any implication I’ve made that Thomas is bigoted towards individual Jews, I have never intended such an implication.

I have intended to describe Thomas’ bigotry towards Jews and Israel in the context of his beliefs about their supposed machinations and aspirations in the course of imagined empire building.  Thomas is convinced of these conspiracies and is utterly intolerant of any evidence, explanations, or realities that deny his conspiracy theories.

Since he persists in documenting his theories, hopping nimbly over the evidentiary gaps, I must persist in point out those gaps and explaining the obvious basis of the evidence versus his contrived explanations.

Thomas does define my objections accurately:

Pain’s argument with me is that I (1) call the invasion of Iraq fraudulent, (2) state that the US government and politicians are subservient to Israel, (3) claim that Jews pursue expansion in the Middle East, and (4) that Jews stole Palestine from Arabs.

Regarding #1, he refers to this article of his as establishing that fact.  I respond by reference to this article of mine that exposes the fallacy of his argument.

He now adds these words:

“There can be little or no doubt that Bush was fully aware of the fact that the information on which he based his plans was false.”

There can actually be great doubt, insurmountable doubt.  Thomas has referred to one piece of the evidence Bush used to justify (base) the invasion of Iraq.  Bush provided a long list of reasons that have not been proven false.  He adds:

His subsequent attempts to make it look as if the WMD had been found or that there was strong evidence that they had really existed at one time or another only confirm the fraudulency of his rationale. I am not willing to admit that this is a mere opinion.

That WMDs existed in Iraq is true beyond doubt.  They were seen, photographed, inventoried, and tracked.  That Saddam refused to disclose what had become of those WMDs, in any conclusive way, was a major cause of the war.  The disposition of those WMDs remains unsubstantiated to this day.  I would not ask Thomas to admit his belief that they never existed is “mere opinion,” he is merely wrong.

Regarding #2, he first refers to a statement by Senator Fullbright confirming the Jewish control over the U.S. Senate regarding Middle East policy.  I can only respond that citing someone else’s opinion does not convert one’s own opinion into fact.  We will require the evidence on which Senator Fullbright based his conclusion before we accept his conclusion as true.

Thomas next provides a link to a CBS News article that alludes to the power and influence of the AIPAC lobby.  Again, it provides no evidence of this power, only statements by individuals alluding to such.  Please tell us, Thomas, by what force does this lobby exert its control?  Why are these weapons of influence hidden and why are its victims afraid to speak out?

One weapon to which Thomas has repeatedly alluded is the Jewish control of the media.  Isn’t CBS one of those media companies you’ve named as under Jewish control, Thomas?  Yet, this CBS News article is clearly not supportive of Jewish interests, how do you explain that reality, Thomas?  And how about the other examples of journalism that do not support Israel, the newspapers and television are rife with these?

This is one of those glaring evidentiary gaps that the purveyors of conspiracy theories ignore.  I’ve asked Thomas this question before; he’s ignored it.  My rebuttal to #1, linked above, cites similar gaps in his theory.

Similarly, he posits that the passing of a House bill supporting Israel in its recent skirmish with Hezbollah as evidence of Jewish control of that body because one poll found the public’s support at 57%, but the House approved the bill by a 98% majority.  He’s raised this point before, and I’ve denied it before although he never addressed my denial.  I’ll make my point again:

Please, Thomas, tell us:  which Representative should have changed his vote if 57% of his constituents were in favor of the resolution?  Why should any Representative have voted against the resolution if the solid majority of his constituents favored it?  By Thomas’ logic, if 99% of Americans favored the bill, then unless 1% of Representatives voted against it, they were all controlled by the Jews.  Unless every American cast a vote in the House, the results from those Representatives will always just “represent” the mass opinion, and not “reflect” it exactly.

If you want us to believe that Jews control our government, we need ascertainable facts and evidence, not vague accusations, quotations of others’ vague accusations, or distorted logic.

Regarding #3 and #4, Thomas does not attempt much of a defense.  Citing Bible verses does not prove the intent of a modern government without evidence, but I can agree with Thomas that those verses “means that Orthodox Jews aspire to hegemony in Iraq.”  Yet, the views of a small minority of Jews, scattered around the world, do not represent Israel’s government.  And Thomas even admits so:

“Modern secular Jews don’t make such pronouncements (expansionism), but I wouldn’t rule out the possibility that they also are thinking along those lines.  It would be impolitic for them to broadcast it at present, but who knows what might transpire further down the line?  So it’s no mere conspiracy theory that some, if not all Israelis, want Iraq.”

No, Thomas, it is not a conspiracy theory that “some” seek expansion, but you’ve not phrased it as “some” in your past articles.  You imply that it is the absolute intent of the world Jewish movement and Israel’s government.  That is a conspiracy theory.

Thomas links to an article by John Henshaw dating back to 1968 that theorizes on Zionist expansionism.  That the article’s conclusions are almost total conjecture is obvious, but one, in particular, stands out:

“According to the Zionists’ schedule of operations, within a decade the Israeli empire <will> be the master of the Middle East and take its place as a nuclear superpower on equal footing with the Soviet Union and the United States.”

That belief taints the entirety of the article.  His conspiracy theory on Israel expansion is rabid, and the holes in the theory gaping.  That he missed the mark so badly was easy to predict.  Yet, Thomas holds the document up as a paragon of truth – sheesh!

As for that article’s and the Wikipedia entry that describe the “Greater Israel” described in the Bible – so what?  We need actions and facts, Thomas, not centuries-old declarations and recent mutterings that lack substantiation.

I do like to compare the two maps Thomas provides.  The first shows the original demarcations of Israel as set forth by the U.N.  I find it odd that Thomas declares his nonsupport of the U.N. resolution - on what grounds does he deny the jurisdiction of that world body?  The entire world, as represented by the U.N., agrees to Israel’s creation, but it is still illegitimate to Thomas?

But importantly, compare that map to the current map he provides.  Has Israel encroached upon Syria?  Or Lebanon?  Or Egypt?  Or Saudi Arabia?  No, they have not.  The U.N. created an Israel of two parts – one under Jewish control and one Palestinian.  Within a year of that creation, Arab countries attacked the Jews.  After winning the two wars for independence, Jews consolidated most of the two parts into a single Israel.

Since that time, Israel has been attacked repeatedly by Arabs and itself initiated the Six-Day War.  Israel has won each war, yet its boundaries have never exceeded the line drawn by that first U.N. resolution.  Israel has repeatedly returned land captured in these wars.  Yet, Thomas cites their control over that unified Israel as expansionism, and uses it to declare more ambitious plans that seem surreal at best.

	Web useless-knowledge.com