Antisemitism rising sharply across Europe

1641

Here is a piece from a New York Times article about conflating criticism of Israel with anti-semitism. The article relates to Corbyn and Labour but it can be read more generally:

"There’s nothing anti-Semitic about sympathy for the Palestinian cause or support of Palestinian statehood or disdain for the rightist government of the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and its kick-the-can policies to prolong or eternize the occupation of the West Bank. That should be obvious.
But where anti-Zionism crosses into anti-Semitism should also be obvious: dehumanizing or demonizing Jews and propagating the myth of their sinister omnipotence; accusing Jews of double loyalties as a means to suggest their national belonging is of lesser worth; denying the Jewish people’s right to self-determination; blaming through conflation all Jews for the policies of the Israeli government; pursuing the systematic “Nazification” of Israel; turning Zionism into a synonym of racism.

The denial of the millennial Jewish link to the Holy Land and the dismissal of the legal basis for the modern Jewish state in United Nations Resolution 181 of 1947 (Arab armies went to war against its Palestinian-Jewish territorial compromise and lost) as a means to argue for the abolition of the Jewish homeland and portray it as an immoral, colonial exercise in theft often flirts with anti-Semitism. It is at its most egregious when it issues from Europeans who seem to have forgotten where the Holocaust was perpetrated. Once in the gas chambers was enough for the Jews."
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/28/opinion/corbyn-berger-anti-semitism.html

I would myself add where criticism of Israel is exclusive and repetitive without any acknowledgement of the threat to their existence that they face from the uncomprimising Hamas and their allies.

Anyone who doesn't think that criticism of Israel often is a cover for anti-semetism and/or doesn't think that Israel like to use the argument turned around to deflect any criticism has little credibility in any discussion on Israel or anti-semetism.

Baggly

Lol Button if thats a sideswipe at me, ill take it, but only because its grossly misplaced.

I dont get why people are objecting to requests for substantiation of points. I havent even disagreed with Wibbs - ive literally just asked him to substantiate his points!

Igotadose

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Do you think Hamas would be 'blatantly anti semite' if Palestinians weren't persecuted and murdered by the Israeli state?
No. You'll find critisism of Israel goes beyond, 'they look shifty'.
Tell that to BibI.

Uhh, yeah, I can just see Hamas being the most tolerant and cooperative bunch of lads should the hostilities drop off. But do tell, how with Hamas launching rockets and goading their followers into attacking troops, will this happen? And if Hamas backs off, what do you think their Iranian backers will do to them?

Pter

Pter wrote: »

Lol Button if thats a sideswipe at me, ill take it, but only because its grossly misplaced.

I dont get why people are objecting to requests for substantiation of points. I havent even disagreed with Wibbs - ive literally just asked him to substantiate his points!

It's facetious in the extreme to ask someone to substantiate something so well known and obvious.

Wibbs

Pter wrote: »

Thats not my logic at all and i hope you know that and are just being facetious.

I'm just reading what you're writing.

If its possible for me to not be anti-semitic, its possible for others to as well.

You don't say... Of course it is. Jesus. You may have missed the part where I said "often", not "always", not "never".

You accused another in this thread of not liking an alternative viewpoint. Im actually just trying to explore yours and you dont seem happy about it, nor actually willing to engage.

Their "alternative viewpoint" consisted of calling other posters "lowlives"(sic) and "scumbags" in a "cesspool" of a thread. Cicero would be proud...

And I'm perfectly happy and happy to engage and have done and even provided links for fairly obvious stuff for anyone with even a passing interest in the matter. See. Now. Me. Engaging. As for petty, being honest it's more akin to mild exasperation in needing to point out the obvious.

cameramonkey

1641 wrote: »

Here is a piece from a New York Times article about conflating criticism of Israel with anti-semitism. The article relates to Corbyn and Labour but it can be read more generally:

"There’s nothing anti-Semitic about sympathy for the Palestinian cause or support of Palestinian statehood or disdain for the rightist government of the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and its kick-the-can policies to prolong or eternize the occupation of the West Bank. That should be obvious.
But where anti-Zionism crosses into anti-Semitism should also be obvious: dehumanizing or demonizing Jews and propagating the myth of their sinister omnipotence; accusing Jews of double loyalties as a means to suggest their national belonging is of lesser worth; denying the Jewish people’s right to self-determination; blaming through conflation all Jews for the policies of the Israeli government; pursuing the systematic “Nazification” of Israel; turning Zionism into a synonym of racism.

The denial of the millennial Jewish link to the Holy Land and the dismissal of the legal basis for the modern Jewish state in United Nations Resolution 181 of 1947 (Arab armies went to war against its Palestinian-Jewish territorial compromise and lost) as a means to argue for the abolition of the Jewish homeland and portray it as an immoral, colonial exercise in theft often flirts with anti-Semitism. It is at its most egregious when it issues from Europeans who seem to have forgotten where the Holocaust was perpetrated. Once in the gas chambers was enough for the Jews."
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/28/opinion/corbyn-berger-anti-semitism.html

I would myself add where criticism of Israel is exclusive and repetitive without any acknowledgement of the threat to their existence that they face from the uncomprimising Hamas and their allies.

Do you really think Hamas pose a threat to the existence of Israel?

They have no serious military capacity, have you seen the balloons with firebombs attached or the tin can rockets they fire?


How do you think Hamas could possibly threaten Israel?

Baggly

Deleted User wrote: »

It's facetious in the extreme to ask someone to substantiate something so well known and obvious.

Its not at all! Im trying to learn! And since people on this thread seem to know whats going on, i want to learn what they have learned (from source).

Of course i can google the topic in general, but ill get a myriad of sh!te in the results and (most likely) a lot of propaganda from both sides of the divide! Why wouldnt i ask yourself or Wibbs or anyone else to let me read what you have read?

Franz Von Peppercorn

1641 wrote: »

Here is a piece from a New York Times article about conflating criticism of Israel with anti-semitism. The article relates to Corbyn and Labour but it can be read more generally:

"There’s nothing anti-Semitic about sympathy for the Palestinian cause or support of Palestinian statehood or disdain for the rightist government of the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and its kick-the-can policies to prolong or eternize the occupation of the West Bank. That should be obvious.
But where anti-Zionism crosses into anti-Semitism should also be obvious: dehumanizing or demonizing Jews and propagating the myth of their sinister omnipotence; accusing Jews of double loyalties as a means to suggest their national belonging is of lesser worth; denying the Jewish people’s right to self-determination; blaming through conflation all Jews for the policies of the Israeli government; pursuing the systematic “Nazification” of Israel; turning Zionism into a synonym of racism.

The denial of the millennial Jewish link to the Holy Land and the dismissal of the legal basis for the modern Jewish state in United Nations Resolution 181 of 1947 (Arab armies went to war against its Palestinian-Jewish territorial compromise and lost) as a means to argue for the abolition of the Jewish homeland and portray it as an immoral, colonial exercise in theft often flirts with anti-Semitism. It is at its most egregious when it issues from Europeans who seem to have forgotten where the Holocaust was perpetrated. Once in the gas chambers was enough for the Jews."
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/28/opinion/corbyn-berger-anti-semitism.html

I would myself add where criticism of Israel is exclusive and repetitive without any acknowledgement of the threat to their existence that they face from the uncomprimising Hamas and their allies.

The threat to Israel is probably the lesser of the threats to the people in the area. Sure hamas blusters a bit. There are lots of threats to the Palestinians from Israeli politicians and that’s probably more likely to be an actual existential threat.

Baggly

Wibbs wrote: »

I'm just reading what you're writing.

Right.

Wibbs wrote: »

You don't say... Of course it is. Jesus. You may have missed the part where I said "often", not "always", not "never".

And i wanted to know why you said often and not 'rarely' or 'sometimes'. Its not an unreasonable thing to ask.

Wibbs wrote: »

Their "alternative viewpoint" consisted of calling other posters "lowlives"(sic) and "scumbags" in a "cesspool" of a thread. Cicero would be proud...

Maybe i misread that post but he posted 'you'd', not 'one would'. I thought he was inferring hypocrisy on you, rather that calling you the names quoted.

Wibbs wrote: »

And I'm perfectly happy and happy to engage and have done and even provided links for fairly obvious stuff for anyone with even a passing interest in the matter. See. Now. Me. Engaging. As for petty, being honest it's more akin to mild exasperation in needing to point out the obvious.

Well for someone happy to engage you sure have posted a lot of sly little remarks. In fact the quote above has a few of them, as an example.

God Wibbs, for someone who was extolling the virtues of always being able to question historical events (which you did in this thread), are you now turning around saying that obvious things shouldn't need to be substantiated?

Wibbs

1641 wrote: »

I would myself add where criticism of Israel is exclusive and repetitive without any acknowledgement of the threat to their existence that they face from the uncomprimising Hamas and their allies.

+1, but let's face it 1641 that part of the world and its politics and religions has been a shit show for literally thousands of years with precious few groups without blood on their hands. Attempting to solve it is like trying to knit with water. Even understanding it is a mind bender.

Antisemitism within Europe is a little more understandable as far as reasons and responses to it go over the centuries. Solving it on the other hand... It's written deep into many cultures within Europe(and it travelled to the US with some). It has thankfully unraveled a good bit since world war two, but it seems it doesn't take much for it to get ugly again as we're seeing at the moment. I suspect and hope it's a temporary blip, fuelled by the wider general swing to more extreme positions across the national and political landscapes and it will swing back into the background again. I did day I hope...

Baggly

Assetbacked wrote: »

This thread;

"Show source for that statement"

/ Source provided

/ Poster ignores and doesn't follow up

Do you know what, you are right. Thank you to Danzy for sending on that link.

I already thanked Wibbs, so wrong on that one, though.

1641

cameramonkey wrote: »

Do you really think Hamas pose a threat to the existence of Israel?

They have no serious military capacity, have you seen the balloons with firebombs attached or the tin can rockets they fire?


How do you think Hamas could possibly threaten Israel?

They don't pose such a threat because of the imbalance in armoury. They have often spoken of their intention. It is murder on a grand scale and the total destruction of Israel.

Franz Von Peppercorn

1641 wrote: »

They don't pose such a threat because of the imbalance in armoury.

Right ho.

cameramonkey

1641 wrote: »

They don't pose such a threat because of the imbalance in armoury. They have often spoken of their intention. It is murder on a grand scale and the total destruction of Israel.

Hamas have said lots of things but we must deal with reality. If you talk up Hamas as a threat to the existence of Israel then you are not dealing with reality, in fact you are dealing in lies.

1641

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The threat to Israel is probably the lesser of the threats to the people in the area. Sure hamas blusters a bit. There are lots of threats to the Palestinians from Israeli politicians and that’s probably more likely to be an actual existential threat.

Are you on for understatement of the century? They don't bluster a bit. Look at the Wikipedia Page linked below, eg, Section 8 The Charter. Or the treatment of their own people - 9.6, 10.3, 10.4.


If Israel were posing that kind of threat, given their firepower, they could have done it by now.

Edit: Link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas

Danzy

I've a lot of time for the Palestinians, they have a raw deal and deserve a 2 State solution, more but reality will not allow that.

Worth pointing out that with regards to Jews Gays, women, Hamas are up there with the SS.

Numerical weakness and lack of tech. not withstanding.

Israel did a lot to help Hamas replace the PLO and strategically it was a smart and beneficial move for them.

It would be a very optimistic person who could see right of return being granted and not ending in a wipe out of Jews.

1641

Danzy wrote: »

I've a lot of time for the Palestinians, they have a raw deal and deserve a 2 State solution.

Worth pointing out that with regards to Jews Gays, women, Hamas are up there with the SS.

Numerical weakness and lack of tech. not withstanding.

Israel did a lot to help Hamas replace the PLO and strategically it was a smart and beneficial move for them.

It would be a very optimistic person who could see right of return being granted and not ending in a wipe out of Jews.

I am totally opposed to Israeli settlements and would love to see a viable (for both sides) 2 state solution. But the lack of a settlement is not just down to Israel. And Hamas are seriously nasty.

1641

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

I get it when some people are criticising Israel or whatever but it always surprises me that people in Ireland have any opinion on Jewish people, I mean we are not really in contact with them and they seem harmless enough.

I suspect that historically it is lucky that they never settled here in large numbers - both for their sakes and our own reputation. It is unlikely that the ugly European anti-semitism would have passed us by. Our Ambassador to Berlin at the time of Kristalnacht (1938) described Jews as "undesirables" who were involved in pornography, abortion and the "international white slave traffic". He thought our immigration policy was "inordinately liberal towards the wrong sort of people" (Jews).


We did have a nasty pogram in Limerick when a group of Lithuanian jews settled there. It seems to have united almost everyone - priests , politicicians, businesses and ordinary Joes. Arthur Griffith (Sinn Fein founder) stuck his oar in too. Michael Davitt of the Land League tried to offer reason but was ignored. Here is a link to an account :


https://www.historyireland.com/20th-century-contemporary-history/the-limerick-pogrom-1904/

Danzy

1641 wrote: »

I am totally opposed to Israeli settlements and would love to see a viable (for both sides) 2 state solution. But the lack of a settlement is not just down to Israel. And Hamas are seriously nasty.

No, in reality neither side want a settlement.
I think that Israel viewed the 90s peace process as a time buying exercise.

The Palestinian side couldn't sell the reality of a 2 State deal.

Franz Von Peppercorn

1641 wrote: »

Are you on for understatement of the century? They don't bluster a bit. Look at the Wikipedia Page linked below, eg, Section 8 The Charter. Or the treatment of their own people - 9.6, 10.3, 10.4.


If Israel were posing that kind of threat, given their firepower, they could have done it by now.

Edit: Link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas

Yeh and a two year old threatened to kill me once. The threat to Palestinians obviously far greater, in particular from the Israeli right wing.

One thing not mentioned here is that a lot of the new fascist movements in Europe, in the UK in particular tend to march with the Israeli flag. It’s is Europe’s Muslim population that has to fear the right in Europe, and in the U.S. and other places like New Zealand. As Ilhan Omar is finding out, some of the right wing rhetoric is related to her mild critiques of Islam.

1641

Danzy wrote: »

No, in reality neither side want a settlement.
I think that Israel viewed the 90s peace process as a time buying exercise.

The Palestinian side couldn't sell the reality of a 2 State deal.

I think you may well be right on both scores - certainly with the current leadership on each side.

So it will probable drag on and on. In the longer term this may serve the Palestinian side better than the Israeli one.

Franz Von Peppercorn

1641 wrote: »

I suspect that historically it is lucky that they never settled here in large numbers - both for their sakes and our own reputation. It is unlikely that the ugly European anti-semitism would have passed us by. Our Ambassador to Berlin at the time of Kristalnacht (1938) described Jews as "undesirables" who were involved in pornography, abortion and the "international white slave traffic". He thought our immigration policy was "inordinately liberal towards the wrong sort of people" (Jews).


We did have a nasty pogram in Limerick when a group of Lithuanian jews settled there. It seems to have united almost everyone - priests , politicicians, businesses and ordinary Joes. Arthur Griffith (Sinn Fein founder) stuck his oar in too. Michael Davitt of the Land League tried to offer reason but was ignored. Here is a link to an account :


https://www.historyireland.com/20th-century-contemporary-history/the-limerick-pogrom-1904/

Pogrom my arse. Barely a boycott. Later on Dublin and Cork had Jewish mayors before any US city.

James Brown

Igotadose wrote: »

Uhh, yeah, I can just see Hamas being the most tolerant and cooperative bunch of lads should the hostilities drop off. But do tell, how with Hamas launching rockets and goading their followers into attacking troops, will this happen? And if Hamas backs off, what do you think their Iranian backers will do to them?

You're gone off and a tangent there. I asked would Hamas be so 'antisemite' as was alleged were it not for Israels treatment of Palestinians?
You're not addressing that.

1641 wrote: »

They don't pose such a threat because of the imbalance in armoury. They have often spoken of their intention. It is murder on a grand scale and the total destruction of Israel.

Monkey see Monkey do? Israel is a criminal regime run by a hateful man.

1641

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Yeh and a two year old threatened to kill me once. The threat to Palestinians obviously far greater, in particular from the Israeli right wing.
.

Are you seriously suggesting that if the Israelis dropped their arms at the Gaza border and gave Hamas access across the frontier that carnage wouldn't follow? Where are you detecting signs of this pacific intention ? It would be akin to the ISIS treatment of the Yazidis (but probably without the sexual enslavement).

Danzy

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You're gone off and a tangent there. I asked would Hamas be so 'antisemite' as was alleged were it not for Israels treatment of Palestinians?
You're not addressing that.



.

Without a shadow of a doubt, they are following their faith strictly and their Prophet was obsessed with hating Jews.

Igotadose

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You're gone off and a tangent there. I asked would Hamas be so 'antisemite' as was alleged were it not for Israels treatment of Palestinians?
You're not addressing that.

Do you believe their behavior is solely driven by Israeli actions towards Palestinians? Or do you believe it's inimical to them?

You believe the former. I believe the latter - they exist to destroy Israel, as was pointed out they'll sacrifice their own (Palestinians) in support of that. If they were so concerned about the plight of their fellow Palestinians, why do they do violence towards them?

1641

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You're gone off and a tangent there. I asked would Hamas be so 'antisemite' as was alleged were it not for Israels treatment of Palestinians?
You're not addressing that.

Monkey see Monkey do? Israel is a criminal regime run by a hateful man.

Hamas may not be so anti-semite if Israel ceased to exist - their stated aim.


A criminal regime - like as opposed to Hamas ? How is the rule of law in Gaza?

James Brown

Igotadose wrote: »

Do you believe their behavior is solely driven by Israeli actions towards Palestinians? Or do you believe it's inimical to them?

You believe the former. I believe the latter - they exist to destroy Israel, as was pointed out they'll sacrifice their own (Palestinians) in support of that. If they were so concerned about the plight of their fellow Palestinians, why do they do violence towards them?

I believe Israel, in it's creation and constant land grabbing and murdering brings it upon itself. I think they do exist to attack/destroy Israel. But that does not make them 'blatantly anti-semite' as was alleged. Blatantly anti-Israel.

James Brown

1641 wrote: »

Hamas may not be so anti-semite if Israel ceased to exist - their stated aim.


A criminal regime - like as opposed to Hamas ? How is the rule of law in Gaza?

Nope. You're confusing antisemetism with a hate for Israel. I'm suggesting the've a problem with Israel likely not all jews and would certainly not exist or have issues if not for Israeli actions.

You see Hamas are supposed to be a terrorist organisation. Like Israel behaves, but not supported by Trump.