Never again? Anti-Semitism is rising to historic levels -- ADL’s Foxman

[Herschel]

— If Abraham Foxman’s predictions are right, “we currently face as great a threat to the safety and security of the Jewish people as the one we faced in the 1930s — if not a greater one.”
That’s the case the national director of the Anti-Defamation League, a child Holocaust survivor, makes in his new book, “Never Again? The Threat of the New Anti-Semitism.”

In his opening address at the ADL’s 90th annual meeting in New York on Nov. 6, Foxman anchored today’s “sobering times” in another anniversary — the 65th anniversary of Kristallnacht, the Nazi-inspired pogrom in Germany and Austria on the night of Nov. 9-10 that presaged the Holocaust.

Kristallnacht, when Nazi-inspired rioters stormed the streets torching synagogues and beating Jews, is a stark reminder that anti-Semitic persecution “started with glass” and “ended with flesh,” Foxman said.

Today’s version primarily is hidden under the guise of anti-Zionism, he said.

cut

http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?strwebhead=Foxman%3A+It%92s+like+1933+for+the+Jews&intcategoryid=4

===============================

Sadly, anti-semitism seems to never whither away. Now it is often disguised as anti-Zionism.

[Maple]

1. No one cares what their religion is

and Arabs are semitic as well.

It's actions that are the problem.

[Herschel]

2. Anti-semitism

is a term for bias against Jews.

[Maple]

4. No it's not

except in YOUR mind.

Sem·ite
n.
A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

[Darranar]

6. You're wrong...

the term was coined by an anti-semite with the purpose of giving a scientific name to hatred of Jews.

Find me a definition of the word "anti-semitism" that includes hatred of Arabs (and does not come from an obviously biased source) and perhaps I'll change my mind.

[Scott Lee]

13. It may be accepted, but it's still wrong

That's all Maple is saying, and they are correct.

"Semite" includes a whole group of peoples, not just Jews.

[Darranar]

15. Anti-semitism is hatred of jews...

though a Semite is not specifically a Jew, that is the terminology. Whether you like it or not is your own business.

[Maple]

17. Rubbish

still playing the violin I see.

[Darranar]

20. How so?

Cite a dictionary definition of anti-semitism that confirms your theory, please...

[Maple]

22. Bat those eyelashes honey

Do the 'who, MOI?' routine all you want.

Nobody's buying that shell game anymore. Sorry.

[sushi]

38. I've been saying it

for as long as I'm here on DU. Whoever coined it has taken it and changed its meaning. It should be "anti-Arab" and anti-Jew." Just as the word "gay" has changed meaning from a kind of happy to what it means now.

[Herschel]

7. The definition of semite is correct

However, you may look up anti-semitism as well.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Darranar]

9. That's off-topic....

Please find me a dictionary definition (from a considerably objective source) of the word anti-semitism that includes hatred of arabs in the definition.

Perhaps my opinion of your argument will then change.

[Maple]

10. Nope...right on topic

Wouldn't matter if Israel was Buddhist...it's the Israeli govt actions that are the problem...not the religion.

[Darranar]

12. I agree with you...

that doesn't change the fact that anti-semitism is bigotry against Jews, not all semites...

[Maple]

14. No you don't

the problem is with Israelis...not Jews.

[Darranar]

16. How don't I?

Cite a post of mine where I disagree with your statement in post #10... link to it as well, please.

[Maple]

18. You are claiming

that Jews specifically are prosecuted because they are Jews.

Hogwash.

No one gives a shit if they worship sparrows. It's the actions of the Israeli govt that are causing the problems. Religion is irrelevant.

Anti-semitic could also mean Bush and company. Goodness knows they've bombed enough Arabs to qualify.

[Darranar]

19. I am claiming that?

Wow, I learn new stuff about myself every day!

Er... right.... I suppose you know what I post better than I do myself...

[Maple]

21. I recognize

hokum, propaganda and fake innocence when I see it.

[Darranar]

23. LOL...

You really do not know what I think at all, do you?

[Maple]

25. I recognize

attempts to distract and divert as well.

[Forkboy]

28. lol

I'm not sure that you do.

[The Magistrate]

42. Clearly, Mr. Darranar, We Need To Hawk Programs At The Door

[Forkboy]

24. You really need to drop in more often Maple

[Maple]

27. LOL I'm not sure if

that's a good or bad comment...but I only have so much patience for all this violin playing and 'woe is me' stuff.

Attempted genocide has been as common as dirt in world history...and this one has been waaaaaaaaay overplayed.

Time to move on...and time to learn not do the same thing to others.

[Cassandra]

36. Which "attempted genocide" did you have in mind?

I guess you don't consider that any genocide is worth remembering. I guess it only matters if we're talking about members of your family.

[Forkboy]

29. Darranar...I never knew thee

:D

[Maple]

30. Then stop playing games

and try discussing the topic without all the emotional melodrama.

[Forkboy]

31. I'm enjoying myself

sue me.

[drdon326]

32. "without all the emotional melodrama" ??

what the hell was that all about??

[Muddleoftheroad]

37. You ignored the question

Which attempted genocide do you think is overplayed? Who should move on?

[Gimel]

49. The word is persecuted, Maple

I wish to ask: what Israeli government, if you can find one, have you agreed with? Religion being irrelevant, don't talk about Israel persecuting Moslems.

[bluesoul]

50. The one I would single out

would be the one headed by Rabin that Israeli extremists killed.

[Gimel]

55. Maple was making claims

Rabin, of course, will always be remembered for his famous saying: They can't kill the peace". He did not live to carry out the Oslo Accords, but Barak followed in his footsteps, and actually did carry out the steps, although the Palestinian militants continued to strike at citizens through suicide bomb attacks, which were just introduced then. That is, the more the gained, the less friendly they became. No one knows what Rabin would have done in the years after 1995.

[rini]

48. That is double-speak

It is politically incorrect to be anti-semitic, but very permissible to be anti-Israel.

BTW, as for playing the violin, someone had to set the fire, Israel will not allow that flame to spread. It is a case of the arsonist bad mouthing the fireman.

[sushi]

40. Some weirdo changes

the meaning of a word, and expects everybody to follow.

[sushi]

39. If semites

means Arabs AND Jews then anti-semitism should mean anti- Arab AND Jew.

[rini]

56. I think this is a good definition

anti-Jewish: religious, convert to whatever and the anti-Jewish sentiment is gone

anti-semitic: is hatred, no matter what the religion, if there is 1 Jewish ancestor you are hated simply for being alive.

[meti57b]

33. If any Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Phonecians

and anyone else for that matter, feel it's important to have the word "anti-Semitism" for their very own, I would be more than happy to let them have it. It's not a word that was originated by Jews and I think it's about time we (Jews) dumped it. Let us just call this form of bigotry what it is ... "Jew-hating". That is much more descriptive and won't cause confusion.

[cantwealljustgetalong]

34. let's give it to Maple...

antisemitism

n.

1. Hostility toward or prejudice against Maples or Mapleism.
2. Discrimination against Maples.

[meti57b]

35. LOL!!

:):):)

[sushi]

41. I agree

We should use "anti-Jew" or "Jew-hating," and "anti-Arab," or Arab-hating."

[Darranar]

3. Foxman?

the same one who approved of giving a prize to Berlusconi the Fascist, who defended Mussolini and denied his connection to the Holocaust, because Berlusconi was "pro-Israel"?

Sadly, the ADL's credibility has whithered away. Now, it disguises pro-Sharon as pro-Jewish and anti-Zionist as anti-Semitic.

[Classical_Liberal]

43. Let's not forget his other friend

Ralph Reed.

[Forkboy]

5. Maybe the ADL can get Berlusconi to talk on this

being the great statesman that he is and all.

Good point here though;

Some Jewish community observers take issue with Foxman’s argument.

The idea that Jews are more vulnerable today than in the 1930s is “absurd,” said Steven M. Cohen, a sociologist of American Jewry and professor at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

“We have the most powerful military in Jewish history” in the State of Israel, Cohen said, “and possibly the most influential Diaspora Jewry since Joseph sat next to Pharoah on the throne of Egypt.”

[Scott Lee]

11. And Bush is helping it along

With his wars on Arab nations. Anyone with half an eye open can see that the world's Jews are MORE at risk thanks to the Sharon/Bush doctrines; not less.

[xchrom]

26. i find it interesting

the war in iraq is going badly -- israeli boot isn't fitting palestinian ass like they think it should.
and now the phrse ''anti-semitism'', or accusations of racist for anti-iraeli rhetoric.
i think these are red- flags. a little ''look over here'' so people take their eye off american and israeli imperialism.
it's gross and it's juvenile but tactics like these work.

[Saudade]

44. Foxman

Foxman has made quite a lucrative career for himself as a professional whiner. While that's good for him, it's not good for jews because it reinforces the anti-semitic stereotype of jews as perpetual victims and trivializes those who have been and are the targets of genuine anti-semitism.

[dudeness]

45. Oh..give it up man!

no -one gives a flying fuck about anti- semitism here..all we want is peaceful solution to a humanitarian disaster..start pushing another wheelbarrow comrade..

[bluesoul]

46. When one starts throwing such accusations

so easily and often the word loses its real meaning and becomes misused more then anything else...

[dudeness]

47. if you throw enough mud..some will stick..

I grow weary of being catergorised anti-semitic because I find sharons policies offensive..this is done by innuendo not overtly ..from now on I personally will not accept it..I discriminate against no man regardless of race or religion ..end of rant..

[Gimel]

51. Alternative policies

The problem of protecting the citizens of Israel might have a better solution, according to you. If you are truly interested in the fact that Israel survives, either as a Jewish state, or the state of the people who presently reside there, that is.

So please, make some suggestions along that line. What would your response be to a couple of suicide bombers blowing up two buses in Jerusalem on two consecutive Sunday mornings, killing more than 30 citizens? (that wasn't, by the way, during Sharon's tenure, but when Barak was PM)

[bluesoul]

52. Surely not

killing 30 civilians on the other side. Bringing those responsible before judicial justice would be a better solution instead of randomly killing along many innocent people.. That's for sure

[Gimel]

58. Deaths

Bringing to justice is not as easy as it sounds. The whole operation in Jenin was solely for that purpose, in fact the operation Defensive Shield which brought the IDF into the areas that were under PA control since 1996 as the Oslo accords stipulated, and initiated after a month of back-to-back suicide bomb attacks in the center of Israel, is solely for the purpose of arresting militant. If those militants throw grenades, shoot automatic rifles or ignite explosives, then there is a conflict. Did you really think this was about taking land? Absolutely wrong. It was about saving lives of Israeli civilians.


The folowing report is Updated May 21, 2003
______________________________________________________

Combatants, Noncombatants, and Responsibility

Almost 1900 Palestinians have been killed since the start of the “al-Aqsa Intifada”, compared to almost 700 Israelis. Numbers like these are used to create an image of lopsided slaughter, with Israel cast as the villain. But such numbers distort the true picture: They lump combatants in with noncombatants, suicide bombers with innocent civilians, and report Palestinian “collaborators” murdered by their own compatriots as if they had been killed by Israel.
More meaningful figures show that Israel is responsible for some 733 Palestinian noncombatant deaths, while Palestinians have killed 546 Israeli noncombatants. Over 54 percent of the Palestinians killed were actively involved in fighting – and this does not include stone-throwers or “unknowns”. And Palestinians are directly responsible for the deaths of at least 253 of their own number – more than one out of every eight Palestinians killed.
On the Israeli side, 80 percent of those killed have been noncombatants. While Israelis account for about 27 percent of the total “Intifada” fatalities, they represent over 43 percent of the noncombatant victims.

http://www.ict.org.il/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=440

[Gimel]

76. So dismantle Hamas

Feb 25 96 In a suicide bombing of bus No. 18 near the Central Bus Station in Jerusalem, 26 were killed (17 civilians and 9 soldiers).
HAMAS claimed responsibility for the attack.


Mar 3 96 In a suicide bombing of bus No. 18 on Jaffa Road in Jerusalem, 19 were killed (16 civilians and 3 soldiers).


Mar 4 96 Outside Dizengoff Center in Tel-Aviv, a suicide bomber detonated a 20-kilogram nail bomb, killing 13 (12 civilians and 1 soldier):

posted here

[xchrom]

53. the problem is ''israel''

a state carved from the backs of people already living there.
i'm not sure you can protect people from the feeling of outrage all of that causes.
the best you might be able to is get rid of ''israel'' and create a greater palestine where all live in one state. but the idea that this violence is going to go away with things divied up like they are is a dream -- a bad one.

[bluesoul]

54. I strongly reject such ideas Xchrom

"the best you might be able to is get rid of ''israel'' and create a greater palestine where all live in one state."

Both deserve to have their states and live in peace. Israel already has what was recognized as Israel, anything beyond that is land grabbing, Palestinians have yet to get an internationally recognized state and I hope it happens as soon as possible. But that does not mean I would want to get rid of Israel or deny them the right given by the UN and international community after WW2. I am sure you are aware what happened.

[xchrom]

61. you don't have to

i don't accept your pov either -- so we're on the same page.
and about ''israel'' deserving a state? -- that i really don't buy.

[Forkboy]

64. Why doesn't Israel deserve a state?

and why the constant quotations around Israel?

[Gimel]

57. Please review history.

The British Mandate consisted of the defeated Ottoman Empire.

http://i-cias.com/e.o/ottomans.htm

This is the partition that the Arab states rejected in 1947:
http://www.mideastweb.org/unpartition.htm


This is Israel today:

http://www.mideastweb.org/misraeldetail.htm

[xchrom]

60. why did the arab states have to accept anything

''israel''is tantamount to the tinkering with somebody else's future, their everyday lives, dreams and aspiration of not just political leaders but average mr and mrs 6 pak -- who i'm sure we're all aware signed on no dotted line and who had been there for genrations.
it isn't working -- and i'll be surprised if it ever does.
and israel is still on life support as far as i'm concerned -- so is not yet a viable state.

[bluesoul]

62. And I thought I was

part of the "pro Palestinian team" here. You are aware how extreme such views are? What is today Israel is a fact, even the Palestinians acknowledge it. They just wan't the land that is occupied back that belongs to them (West bank, Gaza etc...)

[xchrom]

74. charming

as are the posts below.
i'm aware that the continuation of the status quo means a continuation of the violence that you claim to abhor. which i doubt.
unless their is some radical rethinking here -- things won't change anytime soon.
i assume that suits you, and herschel, and gabby's poppy just fine.
now who's views are extreme.

[Jack Rabbit]

75. It is unrealistic to think Israel is going away

Even if one believes that it was a mistake to give birth to Israel, she is there and is too strong to be destroyed. She can't force the Palestinians to capitulate their part of the Levant, but neither can Israel be dislodged. No one is going anywhere.

A two-state solution is the only one possible.

[sushi]

77. I agree

Israel is there now and she's there to stay. They just have to get out of the settlements. Unfortunately, the settlers are already used to their homes in the occupied territories and the IDF will have a hard time to dislsodge them.

[bluesoul]

78. That's funny Xchrom

as I couldn't disagree more with Herschel or Gabby's Poppy regarding I/P. But you really don't see why we disagree here do you?

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bluesoul]

80. No, I don't believe in ethnic cleansing!

I believe the Palestinians have to right to the land that is occupied, where illegal settlements are built and where the wall is being built. There is no doubt about that! When I talk about Israel I meen the green line Israel as recognized by the UN and international community after WW2. Anything beyond that is land grabbing. Is that clear enough? :shrug:

[xchrom]

81. what you call israel was somebody else's home

whether you like it or not.
those people were not asked what they wanted to do with their lives -- others made the decisions for them -- that's hardly self determination.
now you are commited to the continuing cycle of violence. whether you like it or not.

[bluesoul]

82. Oh my!

And what are we supposed to do with all those Israelis living there now for decades? Drive them out? The same policy you are so against regarding Palestinians? I agree a big mistake was done after WW2 by forcing many Palestinians to be driven out. (Britain at the time holding much of the responsibility) But that is now history. We cannot change it. We can only try to prevent further mistakes in the present and future...

[xchrom]

95. so what are the palestinians supposed to do?

israel, israel, israel -- but the palestinians have no right to their feelings of just cause to go back to what they see as their rightful homes?
palestinians deserve the right to that --place -- they had homes there, businesses, families for generations. they aren't entitled to feeling invaded, kicked out, occupied?
the solution is one state and it isn't called israel. and it's probable that alot of israelis would emmigrate. but that's certainly better than this contuation of murder and apartheid.

[The Magistrate]

97. Radical Re-Thinking, Mr. Chrom

Tends to the impractical, and to the bloody. As a practical matter, a "single state" could only be imposed by defeating the military power of Israel. That would involve rather an increase in the sum of death and destruction over the current situation, and it is hardly to be seen in the offing, in any case. There is no Islamic power, or combination of powers, likely to achieve it any time soon, certainly. It is not the sort of thing diplomatic, or even economic pressure, can achieve, as it would alter the fundamental character of Israel. That can be achieved by nothing but armed force victorious.

Nor, Sir, would such an entity necessarily satisfy many of your objections to the current situation. The dream, at least, is not to dwell within a given boundary, but on land formerly owned, in houses formerly dwelt in. In all cases, this could be accomplished only by eviction of current inhabitants. You may take a sanguine view of this as some abstract sort of justice, but those subject to it may be depended upon to resist, and there would be considerable blood, as indeed, there was a half-century ago. Whether you recognize it or not, Sir, you are in effect simply proposing a re-play of the communal hostilities of '48.

The people of Arab Palestine may well be justified in feeling invaded, kicked out, and occupied, for these things have in fact occured. Nor are they going to be undone. No settlement of this matter will right old wrongs, or do any other thing but essentially regularize, and signify both sides' acceptance of, the general lines of the existing status quo. Adjustments such as the removal of settlements on land overrun in '67 will be required, but no great alterations of structure, ot shifts in domicile, will be featured.

[rini]

83. I'm sorry but that is incorrect

there are no Palestinian artifacts, ruins, writings, or anyting else to suggest a presence before (at the earliest) the 1920s. As a matter of fact, the Arabs didn't even use the term Palestinian until the last half of the 20th C, they just used the term Arabs.

[bluesoul]

84. Sorry Rini

Philistines...

[rini]

87. not the same people

The Romans used the word Philistins as an insult. The Philistines were a Aegean sea faring people.

[rini]

88. Not quite

Philistines were an Agean seafaring people much like the Vikings and raided the coast just as the Vikings raided Normondy and England.

[xchrom]

94. poppycock -- rubbish

that area was populated all over the place with small villages and towns -- and jerusalem -- majority population something other than jewish. that's like saying america wasn't populated in order to take something that didn't belong to them either.
geez -- try to stretch your truth just as far as you can to make it fit your notion of right. oh brother.

[Lurking Dem]

86. And the Sephardim are what?

Are they not the majority Jewish population in Israel? They didn't deserve a country? No one deserves a country?

[Lurking Dem]

98. xchrom?

I am interested in your response. Or maybe you wasted no time in putting me on ignore in which case maybe someone else can ask you.

[xchrom]

101. i don't put anyone on ignore

the majority population in paestine was not sephardim -- and the sephardim were getting along fairly well with other ethnic groups in their neighborhood. minus, of course, turkish or british boot in ass.

[Lurking Dem]

63. You might want to edit that.

You actually typed i s r a e l the second time in your post without the quotation marks you are so fond of.

[Forkboy]

65. I just caught that myself

wonder why they are used at all :shrug:

[GabysPoppy]

66. Take two guesses

But look both ways before crossing the street

[Forkboy]

67. I think I know

but wanted to hear the poster say it.

And are you joking about my navigational difficulties when being a pedestrian? :) (just for the record I got hit by a person who ran a red light.I can walk ok as long as I dont chew gum at the same time)

[GabysPoppy]

68. I am definately joking

Maybe I can help you out with the gum chewing etc.

After reading the book "Walking and Chewing for Dummies", I have licked the problem. (at least during daylight hours)

I have not dared to solo at night.

[Forkboy]

69. "I have not dared to solo at night."

Does this mean that someone is chewing your gum with you? :D

[GabysPoppy]

70. Don't ask, don't tell

Plus I am a gentleman and would never kiss and tell.

[Forkboy]

71. lol

fair enough !

[Muddleoftheroad]

72. That won't happen

Israel will fight destruction to the death if need be.

[Forkboy]

73. In other words

they'll die to prevent themselves from dying.

[Muddleoftheroad]

89. No

They will make sure their attackers die if Israel is to die as well.

[bluesoul]

90. Oh

my! I would not wish either...

[Muddleoftheroad]

91. I don't either

I just know that it is the final fallback position for Israel.

Never again.

[bluesoul]

92. I will NEVER happen

You know it and I know it. There are sane people on both sides that would not let it happen. Even those that say (or wish) the most crazy things know that such things are illusions...

[Muddleoftheroad]

93. People said that in Germany

They were wrong.

Saying something will never happen is a wish, not a reality. Reality is making sure that it never happens.

[Forkboy]

96. Still the same thing

M.A.D. all over again.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rini]

85. antisemitism is a given,

IMO, just as worrisome is the lack of a response to the spoken and in some cases its physical manifestations. There is no law, or even rule of law that can stop prejudice, but there are laws to stop the implementaion of hate. These have not been enforced, nor has leadership forcefully expressed disgust at hate speech.

Know your enemies by their silence.

[jplawne]

99. Anti-Semtisim in the Palestinian-Israel debate

I find the Palestinian-Israeli debate contaminated with anti-Semitic motivated comments and reporting and slight on intellectual honesty and encoragement of solutions to the problem as it today. Like much of racism, any given statement can be defended, but taken as a whole it is undeniable. Here are my thoughts.

In general, racism is an attempt to de-legitimize and de-humanize a people. The person espousing often believes they are only stating criticism, when in fact they are projecting behaviour and actions as both intentional and as somehow intrinsic in the people; consider some examples—Muslims are terrorists, black men are criminals and black teens cannot control their libido. Each of these comments rest on some factual dilemma. Yet the emphasis is on characterizing the intrinsic nature of the people instead of the behaviour and its absolutism does not reflect that these problems may be universal, though perhaps to different degrees.

·

• Making broad, generic statements about Jewish control of the media or the US government. I hear this frequently and the twisted, abstract evidence provided is usually proof of the persons anti-Semitism.

1. This has been the historic charge against Jews. Jews are particularly sensitive to this charge, whereas for example African-Americans would probably laugh if they were told this, but would be sensitive to other innocent ‘observations’ that lead quickly to more dangerous conclusions.
2. It is an intentional attempt to not have to tolerate diversity of opinion, but to de-legitimize those that state opposing opinion—is this any different from tactics of FOX TV?
3. It is patronizing to those that support Israel (most Americans and the US Congress) to imply they are nothing but tools of Jews and have no conscience of their own.

·

• Demonizing Israel in order to de-legitimize its people and identity.

1.Obsessive Pre-occupation with every negative thing regarding Israel, which seems to not be of interest when occurring in other nations. For example problems with Bedouins are reported frequently, but not the much worse issues with Bedouins and Berbers in Egypt and North Africa. I argue for providing people with balance and context, not either demonizing a people or censoring criticism of their policies.
2.Portraying every act in the worst possible light and projecting unsubstantiated intentions on Israel and Israelis such as ‘Sharon wants to use the Iraq war a coverage to deport all Palestinians’ , ‘The fence is a land grab’ ‘Jews lead the US into the Iraq War.’ These types of statements are impossible to prove by induction; i.e. there are no explicit statements, policies or historical precedent to back it up so it represents the bias of the accuser and not the facts on the ground.
3.Extrapolating from one person to project onto all Israelis and ignoring the overall character, values and policies of the people as compared to the actual world. Yes there are right wing Israelis, yes a few Israelis have purposefully killed Arab civilians, yes a single cabinet minister can make very ignorant statements. Yet extrapolating from the exception only proves the opposite, unless your ideas are already preconceived.
4.Arguing that Israel should not exist as a Jewish state and falsely claiming that it has failed. Israel is the national expression of the Jewish people. It has a rich diverse, multi-ethnic, multi-religious democratic culture, with a unique and rich language, literature and art and disproportionate accomplishments in healthcare, the environment, science and research. To claim that it should not exist is to argue that Jews are somehow inferior to other ethnic/religious national groups. There are many horribly failed or corrupt states in the world: Zaire, Sudan, Pakistan, Iraq, North Korea and I have never heard anyone say those states should no longer exist.
5.Zionism is racism: this concept again is argument that Jews are inferior and not worthy of national identity and expression. If one finds something exclusionary about this type of nationalism, is it really and different from nationalism as it exists anywhere in the world? Is not who belongs and does not belong a fundamental part of what citizenship and nation states imply? One thought; How does Zionism compare to State Islamic Fundamentalism and Pan Arabism which has driven out their Indigenous Jewish and Christian populations over the last 50 years, compared to Israel whose non-Jewish citizens have grown form ~200k to ~1.3 million?
6.Explaining away or seeking false understanding in the desire of a segment of Palestinians to kills Israelis and Jews. 1) The intentional murder of civilians is unacceptable in any situation under any acceptable value and moral system and to do so through suicide is ever more egregious. 2) To take such actions and explain them by drawing false equivocations to Israeli actions and projecting false intentions and motivations on the killers.
One can always adopt the perpetrator’s external explanations: Germans needed more living space, Southern US Whites were threatened by a black underclass or Serbians needed to defend their historical homeland in Kosovo. Yet there is every indication that killings of Israeli civilians is motivated by indoctrination from the political, civic and religious institutions for the expressed purpose of killing “Jews.” People who are supposedly so horribly oppressed that they cannot control their desire for revenge do not make speeches, music videos, train for weeks, and write goodbye letters on their way to blowing up school children. To explain these actions in any way other way than an explicitly expressed attempt to kills Jews for being Jewish is to defend racism against Jews. See link video www.isratv.com/video/filmpmwadsl.asx
7.Similarly, the idea the Israelis should give up something for the end of violence, such as settlements, it to say that the lives of Jews are a negotiating point and not an absolute categorical imperative.

• Obsessive Pre-occupation with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. I have had conversations in hotels in Spain to wine class in Oregon and have people randomly bring up Israel and claim it is the worst state in the world. People of Zaire (1 million dead), North Korea (2 million), Iran (horribly oppressive), Iraq (before Gulf War II), Kurds (actually a distinct, non-Arab ethnic group) and Tibetans have no voice and no one speaks on behalf of these victims or volunteers to go protect them, or start Zairian Study Departments and Journals or shout down their oppressors when touring. Is the issue really defending the Palestinians or attacking Jews? This is not paranoia, but continuation of Muslim and Christian hostility towards Jews in which actions by Jews are associated with their Jewishness and the Jewish people. I find no resurgence of anti-Semitism. Only a resurgence of expression of anti-Semitism. The lack of historical, political and factual context and inability to make relative comparisons (as opposed to comparing Israel to some utopian idea) strikes Jews as anti-Semitic. This is a fundamental part of racist thinking; holding one group up to standard while ignoring those characteristics in all people and throughout history.

Yes, Criticize Israeli policy with intellectually honesty and correct proportion, as many Israelis and Jews have done. Be Pro-Palestinian in regard to desiring a mutually negotiated resolution. Hold each side up to the same values and not ‘values’ derived from ideology or the desired ends. To be unconditionally Pro-Palestinian in regard to its self-claim of a national liberation struggle is to support a struggle whose main goal is the destruction of Israel and tools has been violence, victim-hood, and intolerance. Demonizing Israel, Israelis and Jews with baseless claims of genocide, violation of international law, unverifiable categorical intentions, and financial control of others or not opposing them undermines the cause and future of the Palestinian people and corrupts the Left the same way support for Communism did in the 20th century. Yes to progressive values and no to ideologies of radical change and violence

[bluesoul]

100. And who are you to say

what is progressive and what not?

[jplawne]

103. I am me

What is Progress? Very good question and a debate that the Left needs to have if they want to form a coherent message and recapture the White House.

That said, "Who am I" is like everyone else who is interested in our society and tries to make a contribution and change. I am part of the community and do not think the tone of your question supports dialogue.

Though I am open minded in expressing my opinion and hearing other opinions on what is progress, I am sure one believing in moderate political change and especially social improvement by governmental action (Webster) does not include supporting or apologizing for those that intentional use violence and terror against civilians to achieve a political end or supporting regimes that use violence and oppression to achieve socialist or utopian status.

[xchrom]

102. another claim of critisizing israel as racist

it's perfectly logical to question the wisdom of creating the israeli state -- and you yourself open one door that i have not opened and that is that it is the expression of the jewish people. there are rules about individual rights in israel if you are not jewish -- it is after all first and foremost a jewish state. at least the way things stand today.
i would claim unjustified paranoia on the part of people who say every critisizm leveled against israel is racist. and that israelis upon gaining a ''homeland'' at the expense of those already living there have become pathologically self obsessed.
there is no natural right carved out in the stars for israel to exist -- in fact israel as yet is not viable -- it exists on life support.
personally i'm not unconditionally pro any body. but the wholesale relocation of one population of people has ment the wholesale relocation of another -- and guess what?
first -- it ain't right
second -- they're resisting.

[jplawne]

106. I'll take your claim and raise you some facts

it's perfectly logical to question the wisdom of creating the israeli state -- and you yourself open one door that i have not opened and that is that it is the expression of the jewish people. there are rules about individual rights in israel if you are not jewish -- it is after all first and foremost a jewish state. at least the way things stand today. not really sure what you are saying. Israel is a Jewish state just like most Islamic countries and many Western European Christain countries are self-declared Muslim and Christain States and at least in the case of Europe, provide equal rights to minorities.

i would claim unjustified paranoia on the part of people who say every critisizm leveled against israel is racist. I would also, which is why I did not say that and that israelis upon gaining a ''homeland'' at the expense of those already living there have become pathologically self obsessed. ah but see that is the fiction. Many people in the Middle East gained and failed to gain a homeland who never had one previously after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the end of British and French mandates; Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon have no more historical claim to a homeland than Jews. Each state with arbitrary lines drawn by the UN and others, was given to various ethnic groups who now had to live together. The Palestinians categorically declined the offer to a homeland. Not only because they objected to Israel, but because they did not want a state. Basic Pan Arab thinking did not support arbitrary states and statehood for people that never had one and who were not distinct, unlike say the Egyptians. Let’s be clear, Palestinians rejected the offer for statehood and waged war against Israel. The refugee status is the result of the war, not Israel’s existence

there is no natural right carved out in the stars for israel to exist -- in fact israel as yet is not viable -- it exists on life support. this type of thinking is ignorant. Israel’s economy and contribution to science, medicine, literature and the humanities in the last 50 years is greater than the entire non-oil producing sector of 100 million Arabs. Millions of people have immigrated to Israel, while millions of Arabs (except Israeli-Arabs) emigrate from the Middle East. Arabs envy Israel’s success, not its supposed failures. I would like to see your solution for the countries of the world that are really on life support- do you support the eliminate of their national identities too?

Personally I’m not unconditionally pro any body. But the wholesale relocation of one population of people has ment the wholesale relocation of another -- and guess what? You are not unconditionally pro, but you do choose to unconditionally use baseless inflammatory words. ‘Wholesale’ indicates you really don’t know the facts or know, but choose to incite— about 1.2m Palestinian Arabs lived in the Palestinian mandate- about 180k remained in Israel after the war. About ~400k remained in their homes in the West Bank and Gaza. So about half the Palestinians were refugees from 1948 Israel and about 15% of these immigrated from Egypt in the last 30 years. Just as many Jewish refugees came to Israel in the next few years from throughout the Middle East and the West Bank and Jerusalem. At the same time tens of millions of Germans, Poles, Chinese, Greeks, Turks, Pakistani and Hindus were moving (often due to the creation of new states) and these people were resettled by their ethnic group and given citizenship. The lack of Palestinian citizenship is an Arab crime not Israeli.

[bluesoul]

107. European countries are not

self-proclaimed Christian countries nor do the laws base on religion or that a country should be majority Christian...So nice try.

[jplawne]

109. Can't think of a good heading for this one

I will let you do the research since you are so interested. Many Western European States (Denmark, Belgium, UK) have Christianity as their state religion, fund the Church with state money, and officiate state ceremonies with religious rituals. They also provide charters for denominations and pay the salaries of clergy.

Oh, based on your response, I think you missed the point

[bluesoul]

113. As a European

I should know better. End of story...

[meti57b]

104. awesome post! well said!

I agree with all of it.

[Darranar]

105. Junk.

2.Portraying every act in the worst possible light and projecting unsubstantiated intentions on Israel and Israelis such as ‘Sharon wants to use the Iraq war a coverage to deport all Palestinians’ , ‘The fence is a land grab’ ‘Jews lead the US into the Iraq War.’ These types of statements are impossible to prove by induction; i.e. there are no explicit statements, policies or historical precedent to back it up so it represents the bias of the accuser and not the facts on the ground.

The "fence" is a land-grab. It is not "portrating every act in the worst possible light" to say so, because it is true.

If the "fence" was built on the Green Line, my view might be different.

6.Explaining away or seeking false understanding in the desire of a segment of Palestinians to kills Israelis and Jews. 1) The intentional murder of civilians is unacceptable in any situation under any acceptable value and moral system and to do so through suicide is ever more egregious. 2) To take such actions and explain them by drawing false equivocations to Israeli actions and projecting false intentions and motivations on the killers.
One can always adopt the perpetrator’s external explanations: Germans needed more living space, Southern US Whites were threatened by a black underclass or Serbians needed to defend their historical homeland in Kosovo. Yet there is every indication that killings of Israeli civilians is motivated by indoctrination from the political, civic and religious institutions for the expressed purpose of killing “Jews.” People who are supposedly so horribly oppressed that they cannot control their desire for revenge do not make speeches, music videos, train for weeks, and write goodbye letters on their way to blowing up school children. To explain these actions in any way other way than an explicitly expressed attempt to kills Jews for being Jewish is to defend racism against Jews. See link video www.isratv.com/video/filmpmwadsl.asx

You're wrong. Supporting and/or justifying actions and giving reasons for them are different matters entirely. I hope you can understand the distinction.

I understand why israel uses excessive force against the Palestinians; that does not mean that I support it. Understanding is not support.

Anti-Ziionism is in no way anti-semitism. The belief that a Jewish state, or a Jewish state in Palestine, is wrong is not anti-semitic. Being against states that have racist immigration policies or involve knocking people off their land to get it is not anti-semitic. I personally disagree with those people - a refuge for Jews is needed, and destroying it would be impractical now - but that does not make them anti-semitic.

[jplawne]

108. Junk: such a lovely way with words

I would only add that
- land grap: but you see that's your opinion, not a fact, and I can't disprove it because you have not supported you opinion with anything. That’s why one cannot debate abstract, baseless accusations, unless we are 8 and in the schoolyard. Thus, there only purpose is to demonize and slander. All I know is that Israel has sovereignty over the West Bank as declared by the UN and Israel offered Palestinians a state and still supports doing so, but the Palestinians rejected it or the idea of peaceful negotiations.
- By your definition most of the world has a racist immigration policy. It is only in the US and Canada that I am aware that people consider it a basic right to immigrate regardless of ones background. Even then, it is not an absolute right as there are many criteria. Also, every state has the implicit right to maintain their ethnic identity. NO state in the world would purposefully make themselves a minority. In Europe, children born to 'temporary' workers that have lived there for 25 years are not citizens. Most Moslem nations restrict office holding to Moslems and many apply different laws based on religion. Many nations do not have any real immigration policy (Japan) or favor those with an ethnic connection.
-Point about giving 'reasons' for homicide bombers: the ‘reasons’ given are baseless not just to an independent factual anaylsis, but based on the actual words and actions of Islamic Jihad and the PA. They encourage, support and celebrate the killing of Jews (not Israelis) for the purpose of defeating Israel. This is their stated goal. It is only in Western Press and among Western Pro-Palestinians that the reasons are twisted and made a factor of their condition. The question is begged: why would people make up alternate reasons for the purposeful killing of Jews by organizations and ignore the self-state racist purpose of such attacks?

[Darranar]

110. Conformity is not a justification...

nor did you explain how me saying that the wall is a land-grab is anti-semitic.

And no, the reasons given are not baseless. The terrorist organizations can say what they want.

Name an area in the world that has produced terrorists that does not have a horrendous domestic situation.

[jplawne]

111. Good weekend

Your right, I can't say statements like land-grab is anti-Semitic which is why I write that individual statements can always be defended as not anti-Semitic such as this baseless 'land grab' statement, and the 'genocide' ones, and the 'Likud will deport Palestinians during the Iraq war one.' If used along with many of the other examples I shared I could be fairly certain that one’s motives is prejudice against Jews and not true concern for the oppressed.

Anyway, I was just sharing my thoughts and would have liked to see people share their thoughts; you have clearly shown that the numerous anti-Semitic incidents around the world (FBI 2002: hate crimes against Jews outweigh the much more publicised hate crimes against Muslins 6:1 for one domestic example) are of no concern to you.

Name an area in the world that has produced terrorists that does not have a horrendous domestic situation
Saudi Arabia, Morocco (poor but not horrendous), Yemen (poor but also a democracy), Philippines (poor, but not horrendous), Indonesia (Muslims killing Christians for no apparent reason), Syria (supports Lebanese and Palestinian terrorists), US (Weathermen, Earth first, violent Anti-choicers), Europe (Red Factions in the 1960's): would say in these cases that the fundamental ideology of the groups in these nations argued for violence against civilians as the primary means of conflict-- not reactionary violence, but strategic, methodological application of violence to kill and create terror.

I really admire the way you can decide that what terrorists say about their actions can be disregarded. It is only what you say about their actions that we should consider. Somewhat condescending is it not? This is the basic trap of ideology. Anything that does not fit your paradigm is ignored. Otherwise, it is not only words; it is PA speeches, programming, textbooks, and TV, sermons, and music videos. Somewhat hard to dismiss all these other aspects of their society? You should watch the video link I sent.

[Darranar]

112. What? You don't think those places have glaring domestic problems?

And please link to evidence that hate crimes towards Jews outnumber those towards Muslims, please...

One can say whatever one wants. It is what one does, and the reasons for it (which are better found in what is done to people then in what they say) that matter.

[xchrom]

114. i am the first one to admit that europe

has a racist problem when it comes to jewish people -- it's how we got to this place after all.
but the relocation of european jewish citizens has not accomplished the maturation process necessary to over come those problems.
the parallels between europe and america are too many to recite.
what your arguments do not justify is imposing a political landscape on the middle east after the fall of the ottoman empire by the brits, french, america and the united states and the united nations, huge mistakes have been made -- and the obvious one is the continuing violence in israel{and the consequent dollars spent by the u.s. to make israel viable}. the relocation of that many people and the dislocation of many more has/had a predictable outcome -- and that's the one we are living with now.
how many israelis, how many palestinians do we subject to being killed, others opressed before somebody says this is just plain nuts?
there was a hugely signficant populatiion of palestinians living inside the borders of israel -- and it looks to me like they are commited with deadly intent to go home. and i don't believe in manifest destiny -- so there is no given right for one group to displace another group for the sake of a fantasy homeland.
every nation in the world makes significant contributions to humanity -- no one has the high ground there and does not justify taking somebody elses home and calling it your own.
all i really think is that there is a body count and a monetary count that has convinced me this isn't going to work -- and that it's based on a misperception of ''rights''.