I think this is one of those occasions when I agree with toadfrog (the "oh phooey" post, anyway).

Musicmic, who is the "we" as in "we killed Jesus"? If you mean the Jews, that was all part of a myth invented by the early Christian church in order to secure Christianity's survival (and, from 315 AD, its adoption as the established church) in the Roman empire. Christians have libelled Jews on this matter ever since, and on other pretexts too, notoriously with the blood libel. The logic of the scriptures (there is little history to go on) is that the Romans killed Jesus hence the Roman punishment of crucifixion. (Victims of Jewish justice were stoned.) Not that it should matter after all this time who killed one alleged Jewish insurrectionist out of the thousands who were butchered.

"Rants" seems a brainless way to describe Chomsky's arguments. Even where I disagree with him (as with his tending, in my view, to a simplistic blame-the-Serbs view of the Balkans, and his more exotic theories about transformational grammar) I still marvel at his scholarship and lucid style.

So I started out somewhat prejudiced against John Hirdsill. A judgment more than born out by his feeble whining about the Zionist project. First he tells us he's not familiar with the phrase, and a few posts later he blandly presumes to tell us what is meant by its present-day use. Has bogotry got no shame?