combatting [false] accusations of anti-semitism

Post Reply New Topic

I don't really think of you as an anti-Semite, but you're pretty clearly a bigot. You seem to be on a crusade against Israel. That kind of behavior lacks objectivity and isn't consistent with critical thought.

Both parties clearly have issues. Perhaps if you gave a minimal nod to opposing arguments you would come across more rational.

You have to understand a few things- Ask yourself why the west spends a disproportionate amount of money, political clout and weapons defending this country. Its got nothing to do with Judaism, or even to protect Jews.

The only reason and reason alone is that it represents a westernised outpost for the greater neo-liberal consensus in a oil rich region. Its the west's outpost. By that I don't just mean the USA, I mean the entire Esso, BP, Shell cabal. Israel is capitalism's front line if you will, which is why the right wing fight tooth and nail to defend it.

I was giving you feedback. I have no interest in participating in your crusade on either side of the fence.

it wasn't aimed at you specifically.

First of all, to address the OP, a strong association between anti-zionism and anti-semitism has already been established:

I have previously posted this 2006 study from the Journal of Conflict Resolution as a thread-killer in one of your previous Anti-Israel threads:
http://www.h-net.org/~antis/papers/jcr_antisemitism.pdf

From the study (see page 13):
"From a large survey of 5,000 citizens of ten European countries, we showed that the prevalence of those harboring (self-reported) anti-Semitic views consistently increases with respondents’ degree of anti-Israel sentiment (see Figures 2 and 3 and Table 3), even after controlling for other factors. It is noteworthy that fewer than one-quarter of those with anti-Israel index scores of only 1 or 2 harbor anti-Semitic views (as defined by anti-Semitic index scores exceeding 5), which supports the contention that one certainly can be critical of Israeli policies without being anti-Semitic."

And further:

"However, among those with the most extreme anti-Israel sentiments in our survey (anti-Israel index scores of 4), 56 percent report anti-Semitic leanings. Based on this analysis, when an individual’s criticism of Israel becomes sufficiently severe, it does become reasonable to ask whether such criticism is a mask for underlying anti-Semitism.""

Second of all... about *you*, thomas81:

To score 4 on the anti-Israel index in the above study you would have to respond as in the parenthesis to the following questions:

1. The Israeli treatment of the Palestinians is similar to South Africa’s treatment of blacks during apartheid. (Yes)
2. Who do you think is more responsible for the past three years of violence in Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the Israelis, or the Palestinians? (the Israeli)
3. In your opinion, during military activities inside the West Bank and Gaza Strip, do the Israeli Defense Forces intentionally target Palestinian civilians, or are civilian casualties an accidental outcome of Israel’s military response? (yes)
4. In your opinion, is there any justification for Palestinian suicide bombers that target Israeli civilians? (the yes)

They did not even include the Israel should not exist option, which you are continually pushing. Now, you clearly answer in the affirmative to 1, 2 and 3 (I'm not even going to bother finding the quotes).

As for 4, well....


nuff said.

So you get a perfect score of 5 on the 4 point index of Anti-Israel sentiment. Bonus point for explicitly attacking the very existence of Israel. Or - in other words - the highest score on this index is incapable of representing the magnitude of anti-Israel sentiment that you possess.

So, even if I had *no* knowledge of your views on Jews, on the basis of your views on Israel, my best guess would be that you are at least 56 percent likely to be anti-Semitic.

Now, add to this mix:

- You have an extremely selective anti-Israel focus in the threads you start on WP
- You frequently deflect issues on other topics *towards* anti-Israel topics
- You use highly questionable sources, including Press TV, a channel owned by the government of Iran
- The person on WP currently agreeing the most with you has expressed highly anti-semitic views (Nambo)

And finally... my favorite:

From the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative (reaffirmed in 2007) the Arab League unanimously adopted the following statement (excerpt):

In return, the Arab states assert the following:

- To consider the Arab-Israeli conflict over and to enter into a peace treaty with Israel to consolidate this.
- To achieve comprehensive peace for all the states of the region.
- To establish normal relations within the context of comprehensive peace with Israel.

... which means that your anti-Israel sentiment is more extreme (since these countries will at least consider recognizing Israel) than that of the governments of Algeria, Bahrain, Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, State of Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Yemen... many of which being brimming cauldrons of anti-semitism.

Yes. Even Saudi Arabia is more tolerant towards Israel than you are.

Your view of Israel is that held by terrorist organizations like Hamas, Al Qaeda and PFLP. You are an infinitely hateful individual that explicitly supports a terrorist organization using suicide bombers and advocates for the removal of Jews from Israel.

So, from the perspective of the 6 million Jews currently living in Israel (the number should be food for thought, btw), people like you pose a *greater threat* to them than a lot of people who are full-blown, card-carrying anti-semites.

Sources:
http://www.h-net.org/~antis/papers/jcr_antisemitism.pdf
http://www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/league/peace02.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Arab_League_summit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_sta ... rab_League

Summary
So, who really *cares* if you are "Anti-Zionist" or "Anti-Semitic"? In your case it is evidently a case of "Same s**t, different day."

And as a result, I will no longer waste any more of my time debating Israel/Palestine with you.

This is a "all sea creatures are mammals because mammals live in the sea" argument. The study you posted was full of lies and half-science the first time, and nothing has changed since.

Those who are anti-semitic are inherently anti israel, not because they oppose Israeli treatment of Palestinians but because their first principal is a hatred of Jewry. Neo Nazis, specifically. (White) Anti Semites are almost always, anti-Islam in equal measure. I challenge anyone to find an exception to this rule.

In Left wing Anti-Zionism, anti-Jewish sentiment does not enter the equation. Particularly when you consider that left wing Jewish intellectuals such as Norman Finkelstein and Naom Chomsky are living proof. You have proven nothing.

It only becomes reasonable to ask if a person can be quoted as making a specifically anti semitic remark (on its own merits irrelevant to Israel) and/or refuses to recant said remark.


Only if you accept the legitimacy of your junk science, which I don't. To say its flawed is an understatement. It completely ignores 60 years of historical semantics and the poverty of objectivity faced by arabs on the ground.

Indeed, the 'study' you posted makes intellectually dishonest assertions, tries to condense complicated historical concepts into base mathematical concepts and fails to deal with key, important questions.
Namely-
1) Does the creation of a Jewish state trump all other factors, up to and including the destruction of an indigenous population?
2) Therefore by extension, is it possible to have an anti zionist view as a consequence of factors other than anti-semitism?
3) Is it possible for Jews to actually disagree with the premise of 1) and by extension, be anti-Zionist themselves?
4) Does being a Zionist really preclude being an anti-semite, particularly when it is historically, demonstrably so, that the two are actually complimentary ideas?

Furthermore If I was to accept the premise of your little spin ridden, overly simplified quiz, it would make Mr Chomsky, Mr Finkelstein, the Jewish friends of Palestine or the Neturei Karta Orthodox Rabbis more anti semitic than Saudi Arabia. Many of the arab states don't give a toss about the internal politics of the region or the status of Israel, as their primary concern is maintaining relations with the United States and co. This is illustrated by the fact that the only arab country that seems to take an interest in Palestinian welfare is Iran. The arab states hate each other in the way that European nations do with a definite crab mentality. So the views of individual arab governments count for very little.

Moreover you've completely failed to respond to the charge that the first zionists were secular anti semites themselves.

The concept of a 'safe haven' was the last thing on their minds. The real reason they wanted Israel is because they wanted Jews out of their country, that they believed Jews were financial parasites that were incapable of integration. When you support Israel with such zest, not even contemplating the idea that they might be in the wrong, you are part of that tradition. I hope you're proud of yourself.



Thank goodness,

goodbye.

I’ve got to say I have to side with thomas81 on this one.
Sadly any criticism to Zionist imperialism is followed by buzzwords such as “anti-semite” or “bigot” here in Canada as well. It’s disgusting. Keep proving the REAL BIGOTS wrong Thomas!

Does this mean Iam not a "Nazi" as the snake man who likes to stalk me here keeps telling everyone?

For I am probably also the most prolific defender of Islam here and my "Anti-Semetic" remarks are in criticism of the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians or the activities of a very small Banking Elite who though claim to be Jewish, are in fact just as white as me and do the vast majority of good and genuine Jews no favours at all.

Even though I have spelt out my distinction between ordinary everyday Jews, and the likes of the Rothschilds which I come to from a Biblical stance rather than a neo-nazi stance anyway,
( Revelation 2 verse 9
I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

Revelation 17 verse 18
And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.)
I dont get accused of being a Christian, but a Nazi and anti-Semitic because its an obvious case of name-calling and slinging mud to stop anybody in the world from daring to critisize what Israel is doing to its Indigenous population.
As to why anybody would want to protect banking families who are bringing the Western world to its knees with the debt it holds over it is beyond me, except for the sole purpose of Loyalty to a fellow Jew that is.

So I wouldn't worry about the name calling Thomas, apart from the Israel apologists, most of the world is waking up to what the use of the term "Anti-Semetic" is about and hence is becoming impotent, which is in fact a shame as it exposes the ordinary Jew to the backlash against the handful at the top which has plagued the Jewish peoples throughout history.

I say the real anti-semites are those who are quite happy to think of the persecuting of the average Jew as long as the Satanists at the top of the tree go about their nefarious deeds unhindered.

Perhaps if Anti-Zionists were to present a more nuanced view, their views would engender greater respect.

An uncritical view that labels Israel as an apartheid state is nothing short of mendacious. Arabs hold Israeli citizenship. Arabs vote in Israeli elections (which are among the only free an fair elections in the entire region). Arabs occupy leading places in all aspects of the Israeli state, including the Cabinet, the IDF, the Judiciary, the Public Service and business. None of these are consistent with Apartheid.

That is not to say that Israel is above criticism. Arabs, for all of their presence in high places, continue to be underrepresented. That is a shortcoming meriting correction. The ongoing settlement of the West Bank is a foolish policy, that should be reversed. But the failure to do so does not invalidate the State of Israel. Agents of the Israeli state are not immune from excessive, improper behavior. But they are subject, nonetheless, to the Rule of Law.

Is Israel a perfect state? Of course not. It has a great deal farther to go before it can reach the levels of transparency and accountability that exist in the rest of the WEOG.

But it is, beyond any shadow of a doubt, the most pluralist, free, democratic and transparent state in the Middle East. It is for this reason that I suggest that our criticism of Israel should be constructive. By falling into line with a Palestinian rhetoric that--at its extremes--calls for the Israeli state to be disestablished, we do an enormous disservice to the values of pluralist, parliamentary democracy.

Rooting for the underdog is a romantic ideal. But such romanticism should be tempered by a healthy dose of realism.

Arabs perhaps, who either a) aren't muslim or b) renounce their Palestinian identity for the carrot of acceptance in exchange for their pride and dignity. This functions in undermining the idea that the Palestinian nation is a valid concept and engenders the normalisation against the concept of Palestinian nationhood. Its a subtle, machiavellian form of cultural annihilation. What it isn't, is grounds for embracing a more 'nuanced' criticism.

Moreover, this neatly dances around the components of Israeli policy that do, cravenly and obviously, constitute apartheid.

For example, I note you don't list :-

1) The curtailing of utilities. The Palestinian territories endure drought while Israeli familes use copious amounts of water through sprinklers.
2) The arbitrary stopping of Palestinian civilian cars that require emergency services. On average it takes an injured or pregnant Palestinian 2 hours to reach a hospital for no reason other than military checkpoints, even in life threatening circumstances.
3) The building of a wall which functions less as a security measure and more as a punitive measure against the arab population.
4) The right of return. Palestinians, even if they have generations of descendency, who leave are permanently prohibited from returning to the country. Jews meanwhile, can come and go as they please, with funding from the government, even if they or their ancestors have never set foot in the middle east.
5) Access to air or seaports. Currently the only way to access Palestine is through Israeli customs. This fact is an assault on the sovereignty for an independent Palestine. Also the geographic incongruity between the West Bank and Gaza strip.
6) The arresting of children and the indefinite holding of Palestinian prisoners without charge.
7) Israel's ambivalence towards Israeli settlers on land which is declared Palestinian territory, even according to Israeli law.

Perhaps once these 7 articles have been addressed, that specifically enforce differential treatment to arabs from Jews, then the Anti Zionist lobby can review Israel's status as an apartheid state. Until that day, the charges stick.

Last edited by thomas81 on 03 Nov 2013, 3:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfxJ3q62mbI[/youtube]

^

The issue is, and never was, about what a selection of carefully cherry picked Israeli citizens in a heavily clipped and edited video think. It was always about how the Israeli government, its military, its police and the fringe minority of ultra radical settlers in illegal settlements are behaving.

EDIT: After watching it though, and despite the obvious intent to make Israelis seem reasonable, I notice that they couldnt even get 3 minutes worth of balanced views. The last girl seemed particularly brainwashed and inarticulate. Even half the ones who aren't blindly pro Israel are just pleading ignorance.

After World War II, Britain found itself in fierce conflict with the Jewish community, as the Haganah joined Irgun and Lehi in an armed struggle against British rule. At the same time, hundreds of thousands of Jewish Holocaust survivors and refugees sought a new life far from their destroyed communities in Europe. The Yishuv attempted to bring these refugees to Palestine but many were turned away or rounded up and placed in detention camps in Atlit and Cyprus by the British. In 1947, the British government announced it would withdraw from Mandatory Palestine, stating it was unable to arrive at a solution acceptable to both Arabs and Jews.
On 15 May 1947, the General Assembly of the newly formed United Nations resolved that a committee, United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP), be created "to prepare for consideration at the next regular session of the Assembly a report on the question of Palestine". In the Report of the Committee dated 3 September 1947 to the UN General Assembly, the majority of the Committee in Chapter VI proposed a plan to replace the British Mandate with "an independent Arab State, an independent Jewish State, and the City of Jerusalem ... the last to be under an International Trusteeship System". On 29 November 1947, the General Assembly adopted a resolution recommending the adoption and implementation of the Plan of Partition with Economic Union as Resolution 181 (II). The Plan attached to the resolution was essentially that proposed by the majority of the Committee in the Report of 3 September 1947.
The Jewish Agency, which was the recognized representative of the Jewish community, accepted the plan, but the Arab League and Arab Higher Committee of Palestine rejected it. On 1 December 1947, the Arab Higher Committee proclaimed a three-day strike, and Arab bands began attacking Jewish targets. The Jews were initially on the defensive as civil war broke out, but gradually moved onto the offensive. The Palestinian Arab economy collapsed and 250,000 Palestinian-Arabs fled or were expelled.
A man reads a document to a small audience assembled before him. Behind him are two elongated flags bearing the Star of David and portrait of a bearded man in his forties.

[Moderator edit: (content was redacted) please don't copy/paste entire articles here - this amounts to republishing and stands a good chance of opening up a can of copyright infringement worms. Always provide a link to the full article and either add your own summary or quote a short extract.]

Source: Wikipedia! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel

for every minute of Israeli arab-ambivalence, I can find you two minutes of Israeli hostility against arabs.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nb_vXaVKaMM[/youtube]

The idea of Israel being a Jewish state contradicts the idea of it being a pluralist democracy in the sense that people in the West would understand it.

In Jewish History, Jewish Religion (1997), Israel Shahak (an Israeli Jewish university professor) wrote: "The State of Israel officially discriminates in favour of Jews and against non-Jews in many domains of life, of which I regard three as being most important: residency rights, the right to work and the right to equality before the law. Discrimination in residency is based on the fact that about 92 per cent of Israel's land is the property of the state and is administered by the Israel Land Authority according to regulations issued by the Jewish National Fund (JNF), and affiliate of the World Zionist Organization. In its regulations the JNF denies the right to reside, to open a business, and often to work, to anyone who is not Jewish, only because he is not Jewish. At the same time, Jews are not prohibited from taking residence or opening businesses anywhere in Israel."

Also, Israel thinly disguises its discriminatory practices regarding marriage by handing control of marriage to the state religious authorities.