How the Vietnamese were depicted has nothing to do with whether some people in Iraq are "Islamofascists" or not.
Here's something just posted by Charlie Parks to Marxmail that is relevant:
>>Don't you love the logic? Sharon, whose own party originated in the revisionist wing of Zionism, which not only admired fascism in the pre-WWII era but also didn't even take exception to the antisemitism of its Nazi variety (this would, after all, help to drive all the ashkenazim out of Europe and into Zion), Sharon, who along with his Likudnik predecessor Menachem Begin, openly collaborated with the Lebanese Christian Falange during the war in Beirut (Falange, people! Does this name not ring any bells among supposed antifascists like Berman)--we're supposed to sweep all of this aside and conclude with Berman that opposing someone like this during a protest against American aggression in the Middle East is sufficient evidence of the resurgence of fascist antisemitism. Well, I must say, if Sharon is a paragon of "Western liberal values," who needs fascism? CP<<
I would only add that Kerry's devotion to the Likud cause, a wing of which now openly entertains the possiblity of mass removal of Palestinians after the fashion of Andrew Jackson's removal of the Cherokees or the tyrant Stalin's removal of the Chechens, is far more disgusting than any concession made to Hamas, etc. by some leftwing radicals.
--
The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
