>

wait till they figure out that the palestinians are semites.....
we need to throw this idea that we can't criticize the Israeli government right out the window.
their government is not a representation of the Jewish people as a whole.
when they do crazy things like elected nutjobs that like to get on their soapbox and say things like children that throw stones should be executed has nothing to do with being Jewish. >

You know what is antisemetic, saying Hitler didn’t want to do the Holocaust, it was the Muslims who pushed him into doing the Holocaust. Not even joking, Benny Boi actually said that disgusting shit.
Edit why the downvotes? I cited my source. It’s right there. Are you all refusing to read the Reuters Article from 2015? >

That’s not anti semitic. Thats maybe rewriting history to some extent. But there were Arab and Muslim powers that supported Hitler and supported his mass murdering of Jews. That’s not completely false. (Iraq was a great ally of the Nazis and Nazi propaganda was actively spread in the Arab world. Hitler is not being seen as an evil person till this day in many parts of the Arab-Muslim world, and there was even massacres by Arabs against Jews inspired by Nazi propaganda. >

Iraq was a part of the British Empire during WW2... >

Not liking the government is not the same thing as not liking the people. >

What about not liking zionists? >

Doesn't represent all Jews either...
And given that it pretty much intrinsically involves ethnic cleansing, I think it's pretty fair to criticize. >

LOL that is their go-to response for anyone that disagrees with the Israeli government. What they're doing to Palestinians is worse than apartheid, it could forseeably escalate to genocide IMO.
Am I now a hater for suggesting that? >

Tbf it's sort of expected the way these parliamentary structures operate.
Unless the minority group is strongly concentrated to guarantee representation, its influence is diluted >

I guess if Israel allowed the Arabs to vote twice, then it would no longer be Apartheid.
Israelis moving into the West Bank really upsets me.
I'm all for people being allowed to move freely to other countries, but it feels wrong when Israelis do it. >

Yeah that intrinsically dilutes political power.
Gentrification in other nations does the same.
Deeply concentrated regions put a cap on political power but are "guaranteed" representation to a higher degree. (the "good" side of gerrymandering, where minority interests are concerned)
But dilution can erase them entirely. >

Serious question. Is Israel not already an ethno-state? >

It is, both legally and practically. >

It is Apartheid though. >

Back in My Day, you had to hate Jews to be Antisemitic! >

Israel doesn't need support.
They should not be supported, and realistically should be facing sanctions for their ethnic cleansing practices. 
They have been playing chicken for years.
They have received unconditional support, with only the barest words of reprimand, which never have teeth, so shey "know" there are no consequences for their actions.
If we aren't willing to condemn them by withdrawing protection, we must be willing to punish them in some way.
(we should have been willing to do so to the USA when they invaded Iraq as well... But 800lb gorillas are tough to punish. Especially ones that have cultivated a deep cultural against accountability) >

Then guess what? I must be anti-Semitic because Israel is an apartheid state. Now. You don't have to take my word for it cuz after all what did I know? But South Africa has called Israel an apartheid state and if there's anybody that can identify apartheid it's South Africa. >

Believing that all people who share the same religion think the same, hence a single entity, such as a Nation State, actually represents all people of that religion (as it implies "all people of that religion think the same") and the religion itself, is deeply prejudicious.
(Ponder on what kind of person goes around saying "all whites/blacks/jews/cristians/so-on think/suppport/do X").
So thinking that Israel represents all Jews is deeply prejudiced towards members of the Judaic Religion because it implies "they all think the same", something called anti-semitism.
Any argument conflating Israel with the whole of Judaism (to the point that criticism of one should always be considered criticism of the other) is extremely prejudiced and likely indicates a person who is deep down a xenophobe trying to make him or herself look otherwise without even noticing he or she is still running around implying that "all these people think the same". >

Which is why I said apartheid STATE, as in the State of Israel. I never said it was the Jewish people. But you are trying to change the discourse. The government of Israel seems to have forgotten that " never again" also applies to them. >

I feel like they were agreeing with you and then adding onto that. >

Nice source >

It is anti-Semitic to be anti-Jewish.  It is not anti-Semitic to be anti-Israel. >

The title is extremely misleading. He's not saying it's not okay to criticize Israel, he's saying that the people that claim that it's an apartheid state are being antisemitic, since they are twisting facts through their world view to make israel look that bad. 
Just look at the comment section here, a lot of the people here are talking about how jews control the narrative through money and power. 
Israel does a lot of terrible things in the west bank, but it's not close to apartheid (creating policies that segregate on the grounds of race). There are 20% of arabs in Israel that are equal citizens in every manner. That is not apartheid. >

According to Amnesty and Human Right reports all Arabs (with or without Israeli passports) are mistreated. >

Not sure what you are referring to, but they most definitely aren't. I lived there for a while, if anything they get slight positive correction for studies (it's easier for them to get accepted to university). They are equal otherwise >

That's kind of the point of the original article.. a lot of voices condemning Israel on really skewed views (out of antisemitism). 
For example, they say Israel imposes Palestinians to security checks, but fails to mention it's because there are repeated attacks coming from those cities against civilians. 
Also it completely ignores the Israeli Arabs that have 100% equal rights. >

And in the US, blacks have, on paper at least, 100% equal rights as whites, since 1964. But then why did millions of people take to the streets to demand that black lives should matter as much as white lives? Perhaps it is because claiming equality doesn't matter if it's not enforced. 
The critics of Israeli apartheid, like former president Jimmy Carter, and Amnesty International, former victims of South African Apartheid, Israeli Human Right advocates, and the United Nations, point out how laws favor the preferred ethnic group of Jewish residents while harming the non-preferred ethnic groups of primarily Palestinians. >


And in the US, blacks have, on paper at least, 100% equal rights as whites, since 1964. But then why did millions of people take to the streets to demand that black lives should matter as much as white lives? Perhaps it is because claiming equality doesn't matter if it's not enforced

Yeah, but would you call the US a apartheid state?? Israel is not okay, just that calling it an apartheid state requires special warping. 

The critics of Israeli apartheid, like former president Jimmy Carter, and Amnesty International, former victims of South African Apartheid, Israeli Human Right advocates, and the United Nations, point out how laws favor the preferred ethnic group of Jewish residents while harming the non-preferred ethnic groups of primarily Palestinians.

I read what amnesty was saying, responding to everything there will take way too long, but suffice to say their point of view is extremely warped (which is, again, the point of the original article here).  I mentioned above some things that they warp, but responding to everything will be a wall of text. 
The UN human rights is a another example of extreme bias against Israel (just look at their history of condemnations.. they go 90% after Israel). >

There is bias against Israel because of the ethnic cleansing and war crimes, including the apartheid, not because they are Jewish. The Turks detest having the Armenian, Assyrian, and Greek genocides brought up too, so are you going to pretend that's because people hate ethnic Turks? Every time someone says "Israel, stop shooting so many Palestinian children!" there are a legion of folks pretending that its anti-semitic to ask the Israeli government to stop murdering kids.
Edit: I forgot to add that I was not saying the US is an apartheid state like Israel is, I was saying that just because there are statements of equality on paper does not mean those are always enacted by the State. >


Israel, stop shooting so many Palestinian children!"

Good example of warping facts - other than Hamas storing weapons in schools and hospitals in order to weaponize their kids, this is an outright lie. 
Thanks for showing a great example of my point >

I’m so sick of this shit. It’s not anti-semetic to call an entire government in their bullshit. >

It’s evidently antisemitism to view reality I guess >

Antisemitism has come to mean anything that shows Jews to be less than perfect and ideal beings, whether it is actually historically true or not. >

The only people abusing the meaning of antisemitism are the defenders of settler colonialism in Israel and the apartheid and ethnic cleansing that result from it. >

No it extends beyond just that issue. There sre all sorts of revisionist books that have been written. >

Could you be specific? >

A recent example I came across was in a magazine called " Archaeology" the 1997 March/April edition, in the article called " Digging Old New York." The aricle published some of the results of a dig at a piece of land in the Five Points neighborhood of New York. A row of Nineteenth Century houses had been described by a contemporary of those houses as dens for fencing stolen items. The archaelogical dig found the remains of sweatshops there, promoting one of the article writers to exclaim at the anti Semitism of the contemporary writer, and to imply that the Jews at those addresses had been maligned by him. Well, most illegal activity goes on in the backrooms of legitimate businesses, so it is a gross missapplication of the archaeological finds to use them to claim that the contemporary's claims about those houses were false and anti Semitic. >

Sweatshops manufacture clothing under miserable conditions, I'm not seeing how this vindicates people claiming they fenced stolen goods. A person can be the victim of a stereotype even if it applies to them, it depends on whether there is compelling evidence or not. >

I think a contemporary of those people is much more likely to know the truth of that particular situation than you or I or the article writer. Certainly in the nature of fencing operations, they are backroom operations. I think you are not likely to be an impartial judge of the case. >

The archeological evidence points to a bunch of people locked into a small unventilated room making clothes and shoes, which is unethical whether or not it was illegal at the time. I don't see why you're feeling the need to defend the honor of someone who was probably also racist against the Irish. 

I think you are not likely to be an impartial judge of the case.

What's that supposed to mean? >

You sound like a troll with a chip on her shoulder. Goodbye. >

No it isn't.
See how easy that was? >

Reminder that words are antisemitism, but genocide is just fine. >

Operating under the definition of antisemitism by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance:

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

Too vague. To make things simple, if the UN says it's apartheid, it's fucking apartheid. >

To guide IHRA in its work, the following examples may serve as illustrations:
Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.
Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:
Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel. >

Ok, that's a little broad (particularly a couple of the examples), but calling Israel an apartide state doesn't fit this definition. The EU foreign policy chief is simply wrong >

Leaning on absolutionist religious protections instead of answering criticisms seems fairly telling. >

It's literally in the IHRA definition of antisemitism which we're all supposed to accept despite its creator criticising it.  
Or rather, it's in the examples- the definition itself is pretty easy to accept but the examples were written to expand and contort the definition.   
"Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor"  
The "eg" here obviously doesn't match the definition. >

I dunno.
When you think about it "the existence of A state of israel". Isn't inherently a racist endeavour. It doesnt say anything about the makeup of such a state or even really the location/size.
It's just tries to make it seem like it's referring to the precise state of israel currently in existence. But taken as a statement on its own, its not.
I could (for example) say that the current government/state of israel is engaged in racist endeavours however i fully support a hypothetical state of israel in another form and not be antisemitic by the definition. 
Although i wouldn't expect to escape accusations by people wanting to twist the definition further. >

Yep, you can see that phenomenon in this very thread >

In fact any criticism at all is right out of bounds and shows incredibly poor taste. 
And whatever you do,  never ever ask why they NEED to live in the West bank. >

I don't see how you can call it anything other than apartheid >

Israel gains favour by money or fear.. I wonder which this is >

Um....NO >

Damn Israel stop being so antisemitic