Antisemitism rising sharply across Europe

Shelby Abundant Rank wrote: »

The tide seems to be turning against the apartheid Israeli regime. 82% of DCU students vote to affiliate with BDS movement 1,400 students voted in favour of boycotting Israeli goods.

http://trinitynews.ie/2019/04/82-of-dcu-students-vote-to-affiliate-with-bds-movement/

Get involved with the BDS movement

https://bdsmovement.net

Maybe then they should also get off the internet, after all some of that traffic could be going through Israeli Checkpoint firewalls.

Also better not use Viber either as originated by two IDF guys.

Also maybe they should note Facebook have development done in Israel so time to stop using the old Facebook.
Likewise with Google with it's 600 engineers based in Tel Aviv.

Then also give up some of those laptops, PCs because after all the Intel chips inside may have the ones designed in Israel.

And if they are unlucky enough to have to go to hospital maybe they should not use some GE Healthcare and Phillips kit since it has sometimes Israeli input.
Even worse some of the drugs involved in fighting MS and Parkinsons was Israeli design so better find something else if you get those diseases.

Also the laugh is a lot of the same ones campaigning against Israel and it's products will be the same ones campaigning for clean alternative energy, better irrigation, environment, which is something the Israelis are one of the leaders in.

Every one mouths on about Ireland's high tech sector, but Ireland R&D actually pales into insignificance when compared to Israel's and they haven't the carrot of being in the EU.
It spends one of the highest percentages of GDP on R&D and it aint just their defense R&D either.

Snickers Man wrote: »

Yes. Because all wars are fought to the rules of Dungeons and Dragons. What the Dungeon Master says, goes.

Not at all. Wars are fought to be won. If the Arabs won, do you think there would be an Israeli state? Why does the Germany of today look different from the Germany of 1933, nevermind 1914.

But Resolution 242 which requires them to retreat behind the boundaries of the 1948 cease fire line.

Resolution 242 has requirements on both sides, which neither side has meet to this date. Yes, the 242 resolution has asked for Israel to retreat to the pre 1967 border, while at the same time it requires the Arab states to stop threatening Israel with force and affirms their right to exist.

(i) Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."[4]

Neither side so far has done this, and resolution 242 has been the subject of repeated attempts at a final resolution to the conflict, for example, the two-state solution.

People can interpret this resolution differently for their own aims so for the sake of clarity I will post this.

Supporters of the "Palestinian viewpoint" focus on the phrase in the resolution's preamble emphasizing the "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war", and note that the French version called for withdrawal from "des territoires occupés" – "the territories occupied". The French UN delegation insisted on this interpretation at the time, but both English and French are the Secretariat's working languages.

Supporters of the "Israeli viewpoint" note that the second part of that same sentence in the preamble explicitly recognizes the need of existing states to live in security. They focus on the operative phrase calling for "secure and recognized boundaries" and note that the resolution calls for a withdrawal "from territories" rather than "from the territories" or "from all territories," as the Arabs and others proposed; the latter two terms were rejected from the final draft of Resolution 242

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_242#Interpretations

You don't seem to know what anti semitism is. For a start, it has absolutely NOTHING to do with religion. It's entirely racist.

So why bring up the bible?
I am well aware that the term Jew is more of an ethnic term than a religious one. For example, there are Jews who are atheist and completely secular.

You really are flailing around in your propaganda-induced ignorance, aren't you? Tommy Robinson is a ****. Nothing I have said has any relevance to that twisted little xenophobic twat.

Really because you portray the argument in the same fashion as him.
Focus on an extreme minority, those zealot fanatics who think God gave them Israel and then proceed to extrapolate the whole conflict/problem is really due to those crazy bible thumping fanatics by painting all Israelis as like that.

That is Tommy Robinson 101. He focuses on extremists in the British Muslim community and some of their misdeeds, such as the grooming of young girls. Then he proceeds to draw a big fat parallel to this type of behavior to a problem with the whole group of Muslims living in the UK.

This is what you have done. So congrats, you and him are more alike than you think.
Again, you brought religion and the bible in the argument, not me.

markodaly wrote: »

Those comments I quoted, not anti-Semitic in your book?

Not particularily, no.

Snickers Man wrote: »

This is probably taking the thread full circle back to what the true meaning of anti-semitism is.

I would argue that anti-semitism is NOT the same as anti-Jewish prejudice.

I do think, however, that we should retain some precision about language. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) whose definition is considered as the benchmark to which all decent organisations and people should measure themselves has a very broad definition of the term.
Their own Website gives examples of what they call "manifestations of Anti semitism"
These include: "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."
The trouble with a broad definition of AntiSemitism is it tars people who have legitimate grievances of Israel with the same brush as those maniacs who want to wipe the Jews from the face of the earth.

I am not too concerned about the terminology. I understand that anti-semite as a term is only from the mid-19th century but I think most people use it to-day to include Jew hatred, Jew blaming, anti-Jewish conspiracy theories and anti-Jew violence. I think it appropriate that one terms encompasses all of these in a sliding scale because they exist on a sliding scale. Some people try to avoid this, eg, the wellspoken gent at the club would probably be dismissive if not horrified if classified in the same category as the lager-swilling boot-boy yobbo giving the Nazi salute outside the Synagogue, never mind with his pal wielding the petrol bomb. But there they are, all on a continuum, a violence inciting and perpetuating continuum.

Also on this continuum and in the same category, are those who give the weaselly excuse that "I am not anti-semitic, anti zionist is comletely different" while going on to demonise Israel among the nations of the earth, giving a one side only narrative of current events and historical development, while failing to acknowledge the real threat the people of Israel have faced, and which they see equally as a real threat in the future unless they guard and protect themselves.

People who can acknowledge the latter and wish to discuss the balance of Israeli actions against these real threats, including the threat to their very existence, do not deserve the description of anti-semitic. Criticism of specific policies, actions, politicians, etc within this context is perfectly valid.

But there are plenty who hide behind the "anti-zionist" excuse who are, at the very least, fellow travellers and enablers of the anti-semites. These are especially prevalent among the "woke lefties" who take their cue from current hip causes, especially anything that they can simplistically shoe-horn as "anti-imperialist", "anti-colonialist", "anti-globalist", "anti-capatalist" or "anti-American". They exhibit an extreme anti-Israeli reflex.

These weasely anti-semites are on the same continuum as the right wing "yobbo" explicit Jew haters - and, indeed, the Jew exterminators of our recent European past.

markodaly wrote: »

How convenient (.................) again.

You still haven't explained why or how the lives of Palestinians woud be changed by different leadership.

Odhinn wrote: »

You still haven't explained why or how the lives of Palestinians woud be changed by different leadership.

You haven't explained why you think anti-Semitic comments are not anti-Semitic. Perhaps the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

If you have a problem with Israel foreign or interior policy - fine. Attack the policy.
If you have a problem with a Jewish person in or outside Israel - simply because they are Jewish - you are racist.

Jews are now the most persecuted religion in Europe, much like Christianity are now the most persecuted religion in the world.
If this is ok with you then you are antisemitic and/or Christophobic

Snake Plisken wrote: »

This is the same guy who under his old toxic boards name Nodin said a Jewish couple deserved to be shot dead in front of their 4 kids back in 2015. What do you expect
https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057502438/4

If we're going to go down memory lane, it would be better if you didn't remember so selectively


https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68753412&postcount=6


https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=66516244&postcount=5



https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=83502442&postcount=823


https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=66357909&postcount=1047


https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=87772912&postcount=587


https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=62811516&postcount=326

Sean.3516 wrote: »

You can almost entirely attribute the rise in anti semitism to muslim immigration. Christians and atheists in the west are capable of peacefully co-existing with Jews in a way that Islam never has been in the Middle East. They have brought their antisemitism with them.

A nonsense. It's generally recognised that Jews were - in the main - far safer in muslim territories than christian, historically.

Sean.3516 wrote: »

The worst part is that western leftists are using intersectionality (the theory that the opinions and views of people from groups that have traditionally been marginalised are inherently
more valuable than those from groups that havent been) to excuse muslim anti semitism.

Muslim anti-semitism is based on the fallacy that "the Jews" are some monolithic bloc, much in the same way islamophobia targets muslims.

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

From what I know of Omar she’s also just been critical of Israel.

She hasnt been “just” critical of Israel. She has said the said that jewish money is all that is behind the USA’s support for Israel tweeting “it’s all about the benjamins”, she said that american jews have “dual loyalty” to Israel. I don’t know how these statements are not anti semitic. She also has many relations with people supporting Hamas, a group who’s platform is the destruction of Israel and the Jews.

Sean.3516 wrote: »

First part:
I didnt mean to say that jews have always been treated well in the West. I mean that since the end of world war 2, the west has treated jews much better than the muslim world has. The West through the UN helped the Jews establish a state after the holocaust. Basically every muslim state in the middle east declared war on this jewish state on the day of it’s founding and have with the exception of the Saudi’s in the past couple of years expressed nothing but animosity towards it’s existence.

Sadly true.

Sean.3516 wrote: »

Christians in the West have reconciled the theological disagreements between Christianity and Judaism with the right for Jews to practice whatever religion they choose. Islam is miles behind in this.

Sort of. The fact is that they are named "people of the book" in the Koran, which gives them (in theory) a special status. However the wave of prejudice emerging after the foundation of Israel has cast a "blind eye" over this. There was an incident in the war of Greek independence, wherein a mob descended on a mosque and demanded that the imam issue a fatwa against the local Greek orthodox population. The imam refused, citing the Korans acknowledgement of Christians as "people of the book". The mob killed the imam and carried on regardless.

Sean.3516 wrote: »

The point I’m making is that the left will oftentimes excuse and disregard muslim anti semitism by attributing islamophobia to those calling it out.

Unfortunately the level of islamophobia in the US is such that any casual statement by a prominent muslim is subject to heavily weighted critique.

Stephen15 wrote: »

I'm not sure how many times Ile have to say it but there is no such thing as Islamophobia. A phobia is an irrational fear it is perfectly to fear Islam which is not a religion but rather a totalitarian ideology akin to communism or fascism.

There are too many strands to Islam for such a binary view.

Stephen15 wrote: »

I would say the vast majority of people who convert to Islam suffer from some sort of mental illness it can't be rational to embrace such an evil totalitarian ideology especially the likes of Lisa Smith, Shamima Begum and Sinead O'Connor proves my point a well known personality who is well known to be completely off the wall and converted to Islam.

I can say little to this, save that the vulnerable often convert to less than mainstream religous sects.

Candie wrote: »

The impression I get is that the Far right types who aren't anti Jewish are usually that way because they are virulently anti Muslim. Sometimes it's not a question of who you like more, but who you hate less.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

You can "impression" all you like, but without stats or sources you're only guessing


Let me try:

I get the feeling the far-left* actually hate Jews for being Jews, but they hide behind anti-Israel rhetoric.

*far-left = incl Labour party but I call it far left to make it sound more extreme

Did that work?