I totally agree with what Steve said about "Jew haters" and would only add that when these accusations come from someone who consistently links the actions of the State of Israel with The Jewish People as a whole, despite the clause in the European definition which clearly makes that "antisemitic" by definition, they move from being insulting to ridiculous.
This has now been compounded by the fact Bobad refuses top comment on the latest behavior of Israeli Regime in actually supporting antisemitic propaganda in Hungary because it serves their own political and personal interests to do so.   
According to Bobad, it is "Jew Hating" to mention that fact - utterly ludicrous
Back to Joe
"Spain may well be the birthplace of modern anti-Semitism."
Nonsense Joe - antisemitism is the oldest and most persistent for of cultural hatred - the use of The Jews as scapegoats has never altered or been "modernised" down the the centuries - in fact that which emerged in the 1930s was a return to the worst excess of antisemitism - the pogrommes, the ghettoisation, an eventually mass exterminatio carried out by the Nazis
This began long before The Spanish Civil War was twinkle in anybodies eyes
The International Brigades were a reaction to what was happening on the streets of Britain, not of Madrid - they were a fight against the rise of fascism that was being appeased by "democratic Governments" who regarded Hitler's behaviour not only acceptable, but welcome as long as it did not scare the British horses.
""Soviet dupe" was used often"
Yup - especially by such "democratic bodies as your own House Un-American Activities Committee
The Western economies taken a battering and the main victims (as usual) were the working families - many of the American and British People had taken heart from what happened in 1917 in Russia, when soldiers, workers and peasants got rid of their oppressors and given themselves a hope for a new future
That Stalin destroyed that hope is immaterial - the dream of change was planted into world thinking and might have been realised if, on the one hand, outside forces hadn't broken their necks trying to "Roll back the threat of Communism" and if Stalin, a failed priest and a lumpen peasant with a lumpen peasant's mentality, who had played virtually no part in Russian politics up to the point he seized power, had not deformed and corrupted the objectives of Socialism.
The description of Nazi Germany as "bulwark against Bolshevism" originated in the United States, I believe.
What Stalin did with his "Show Trials" in Moscow, McCarthy did in Moscow, and America's pouring burning petrol on Vietnamese Peasants and filling their lungs with carcinogenic chemicals for seven years ranks next to Stalin'e behaviour, with far less excuse.
Why was America friendly wit Franco?
Why were you friendly with Batista and Papa Doc and Marshall Kee and Papadopulis, and Pinochet - and every tinpot dictator you have embraced as your own right up to the present day - because it suits your philosophy and economic interests to be so - they are all natural developments of the present system in crisis.
America would rather have had Cuba as its open sewer, where Al Capone and his men went to launder money and watch Cuban girls being fucked by donkeys, than work with a leaded who gave the people the best health and education system in the world and held off the threat of invasion, assassination and for over half a century and avoid a return to the situation where six families owned most of the Country.
Please spare us the extremely partonising "Soviet dupes" bit - Capitalism has nothing to offer those who are not wealthy and privileged - it never has had.
The system that you Church had depended throughout its existence has had its day and there are strong signs that it is high time the Church itself went down the pan
Jim Carroll