The Conditional "Zionism" of the "But-However" Crowd

This venomous piece of anti-Harper invective appears in, of all places, the Canadian Jewish News. The writer, one of those "Zionists" whose support for Israel hinges on its government reflecting his own hard-leftist point of view (and who thus withdraws support whenever it does not), is described--nailed, really--by John Podhoretz in this month's Commentary Magazine. The fair-weather Zionist is one of "The 'But-However' Crowd." (I quote from my hard copy of the magazine, since only the abstract is available online):

     The "but-however" crowd loves Israel so much that its members want the Jewish state corrected from the outside because it is too foolish to correct itself. They want the United States to fix it because Israel won't fix itself. But the only way the United States can do that is if the very notion of what constitutes support for Israel is redefined.

     You can support Israel, in this view, only if your support is conditional. If Israel continues to behave in a "bad" way, then your support for it must be withdrawn...for its own sake, of course. You must not love it any more; it will not be deserving of your love, and you must be true to that which is actually lovable.

And, as far as Liberal/leftist Canadian Jews are concerned, Stephen Harper, the most pro-Israel leader in the world, must be trashed because of his unabashed support for what they see as an unworthy and unlovable Israel.

Well, phooey on them and their misbegotten conditionality.

Update: I just left this comment on the CJN site:

I can understand why Liberals and other leftists would be very upset with Prime Minister Stephen Harper. After all, in standing up for Israel in the face of the world's Zion-loathers, he has seized the moral high ground, the very position which the left claims as its and its alone.  

It is a position which former Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff claimed when, for example, he blasted Israel for committing a "war crime." He later apologized, of course. 

Gee, do you think that episode could have been behind Georganne Burke's "partisan thuggery," as Mr. Goldenberg so indelicately puts it?