I Have Seen Too Many Hurling The Insult "Anti-Semite". Please Stop!

[DistressedAmerican]

I will not mention names beyond the slap-downs I have replied to these posts with. But, anyone here that thinks it is acceptable to be throwing around the implication that those rejecting this Israeli assault are anti-semites is dead wrong and patently offensive.

The mods have been good about deleting these posts and thanks to them. IMO, these folks should be banned outright for such overt insults.

Anyone making these insulting claims should stop immediately. It is just plain wrong and unacceptable.

If you see such remarks being posted, please notify the mods right away. That is not the kind of divisive politics that benefits anyone.

Thanks,

DA

[jonnyblitz]

1. it's an attempt to shut down debate with people they disagree with

the sorry assholes that are doing this don't realize that when ACTUAL anti-semitism occurs no one will pay attention anymore because they cried wolf one too many times.

[Smarmie Doofus]

3. Exactly. In fact, it's a *form* of anti-semitism itself...

to use this label as a mere tool of argument where no evidence of antisemitism is produced.

Trivializes the term.

[Klaxon]

94. Indeed

...But,

The "With us or Against us" mantra has a long life, for the slow and fearful.

[Purveyor]

2. It used to be a quite effective way to stifle debate

concerning israel however it has been so over utilized it hasn't much 'punch' left anymore.

Some other labels that are overused and worn out as well include nazi, terrorist, traitor, etc.

[peacetalksforall]

13. Precisely, Purveyor. It doesn't work anymore. Leiberman referred to

us on Sunday morning as "anti's" - or he referred to those in CT as "anti's" as they are the ones who are going to vote. He carefully omitted Semite.

I've asked before and I'll ask again - what per cent of Israeli's are Semites? Few, I believe. This is an unfortunate hypenated word that doesn't work anymore.

Moslem equates with Jew
Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia equates with Israel.

Semite - historical/racial, should no longer be used for political purposes.
Semite - crosses border and religions.

Anti-Semite should be banned in the U.S., particularly by traitorous politicians.

I am anti-Likud Party just as I am anti-PNAC rule.

I have never been anti-Jew nor Protestant nor Buddhist, etc.

I sometimes express my desperation at Israel. They have taken much and given little of lasting virtue to Palestinians.

I resent the axis of love between the U.S.<>Israel<>Saudi Arabia.

I have no boundaries in my disgust of the U.S.U.K.<>Israel bonds that are detrimimenal to and exclusionary of all the other nations of the ME.

Paintng me as an anti-Semite is juvenile.

[Catherine Vincent]

4. Did you see Lanny Davis last week on cspan?

Any caller that criticized Liberman was called a bigot and an anti-semite. He was pathetic.

[Warpy]

5. Funny, I've been expecting that pejorative all morning

along with "self hating Jew" for those who know my peculiar combination of ethnic backgrounds.

That it hasn't happened is a tribute to the majority of people who post on this board.

[DistressedAmerican]

I Was Openly Accused Of It Yesterday.

Despite the fact that I have a track record of getting anti-semitic website shut down. I have seen it hurled twice this morning alone and one person actually respond to that with applause and a note of how funny the attack was.

There are not many doing it. But, there are a few and they seem to do it over and over. Hence, my belief that these people should be banned outright. The ones I'm seeing are not learning the lesson from the thread pulls. They need to learn it by TS if you ask me.

Cheers to the VAST MAJORITY of DUers that would never pull this kind of thing!

[slide to the left]

6. Arabs are Semites

So arabs cannot be anti-semitic. Arabic, Hebrew and Aramaic are semitic languages and Arab is a semitic ethnicity.

[cali]

14. er, no.

The term anti-semitic was coined in 1879 by Wilhelm Marr in Germany specifically to refer to Jews. So although, Arabs absolutely are semites, they can, of course, be anti-semitic when you consider the actual meaning of the term. Lots of words stray from the strict meaning of the root.

[1monster]

32. Definitions of semite on the Web:

Definitions of semite on the Web:

a member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Middle East and northern Africa
of or relating to or characteristic of Semites; "Semite peoples"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Semitic is an adjective referring to the peoples who have traditionally spoken Semitic languages or to things pertaining to them. Genetic analysis suggests that the Semitic peoples share a significant common ancestry, despite important differences and contributions from other groups. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semite

Semite

SYLLABICATION: Sem·ite
PRONUNCIATION: smt
NOUN: 1. 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. 2. A Jew. 3. Bible A descendant of Shem.
ETYMOLOGY: Back-formation from Semitic.
http://www2.bartleby.com/61/87/S0258700.html

Sem·ite (sĕm'īt')
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.
A Jew.
Bible. A descendant of Shem.
http://www.answers.com/topic/semite

[cali]

45. This is a settled issue

And it's like saying water isn't wet. It's settled in historical, academic and virtually every other circle. I noticed you neglected to go to wiki for the definition (pages long) of the word anti-semiticism. Here you go:

"Anti-Semitism (alternatively spelled antisemitism) is hostility toward or prejudice against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group, which can range from individual hatred to institutionalized, violent persecution. The highly explicit ideology of Adolf Hitler's Nazism was the most extreme example of this phenomenon, leading to a genocide of the European Jewry. Anti-Semitism takes different forms..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-semitism

[1monster]

73. I didn't ignore the wiki page. I googled "semite definition" and that

was what came up. I posted the entire listing given on the google link for "semite definition." I did not go to the wiki page.

You are mistaking connotation for denotation. Many people may use "semite" to mean only Jews; that is connotation. The actual definition is denotation and is the correct definition, not the colloquial or commonly used definition (connotation).

[cali]

75. LOL

and how many angels do dance on the head of a pin?

[1monster]

88. I once worked in a cancer research lab where one of the lab techs

wrote a proposal for a government grant to find out how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.

It's been about thirty years, so my memory is a bit fuzzy, but he suggested using hermetically sealed tubes and a known number of angels in one tube with a pin and going from there.

I don't think he ever sent the proposal in though... :D

on edit: angles and angels

[Jack Rabbit]

54. Thank you. I hate it when this has to be pointed out.

It should be added that Herr Marr was himself an anti-Semite who was looking for a term to replace Judenhaus (hatred of Jews) that the public might find more palatable. Marr, like Hitler after him, was a racist anti-Semite who regardeded Jews as beyond redemption, as opposed to the traditional sectarian anti-Semite who really didn't think there was anything wrong with a Jew that couldn't be cured by converting him to Christianity.

The term anti-Semite is a misnomer, but we all know what we're talking about and let's not try to kid ourselves about it.

[WillyT]

86. So... An Anti-Semetic German In The Late 19th Century, Is...

the final authority on what constitutes a semite, or an anti-semite???

You religious people, sure are wierd.



:shrug:

[cali]

98. Don't have much of an academic background do you?

and btw, I'm not even remotely religious, and you, of course, have now idea of what my background is.

The definition of the word 'anti-semite', is purely an academic question, as well as one of common usage. As I indicated, it's a settled matter.

[Jack Rabbit]

102. As I said, the term is a misnomer; but we still know what it means

This is a red herring on top of a red herring.

The term anti-Semitism means a hatred of Jewsd or Judaism, although Arabs are also Semites. It is simply easier to continue using a one hundred-year-old term that we all know is techmically wrong than to try to re-invent the language.

If one promotes The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as a set of documented facts or state that "only" a hundred thousand Jews or so died in the Holocaust, then one is rightly suspected of anti-Semitism, even if one is an Arab.

The real issue is whether one should be accused of anti-Semitism for criticizing the actions or policies of the government of Israel. The answer is: of course not. Israeli Jews ask some of the same questions.

When bombers drop a payload, presumably in defense of a nation, and civilians are killed, then it is right to ask whether there was a better way, whether the bombing raids could have been more discriminate or whether the provocation is worth the reaction. If one believes -- rightly or wrongly -- that the Israeli government is in the wrong in this matter, then unless one has said something more, it can only be presumed that one's contempt stops with Israeli political and military leaders and does not extend to the Jewish people as a whole.

[LostinVA]

7. Thank you n/t

[Jacobin]

8. I equate that to freepers yelling: "Anti-American!"

Its an insult designed to stop the conversation and to label the person who disagrees with Israeli policy as an untouchable.

I do not discuss issues with people who hurl that epithet. They are lost causes.

[TahitiNut]

9. Sadly, ad hominems are a plague on DU.

Whenever a reply places the focus on the poster rather than the post, even when implicitly invited by the nature of the post, it indicates a breakdown in both discussion and reason.

[burythehatchet]

10. One person even compared it

to Germany 1938.

[cali]

11. People should be

careful about throwing that accusation out, and they should be careful about accusing people of accusing them of being an anti-semite when no such accusation has been proffered. That happens just as much. Both are quite often tools to shut up the opposing pov.

OTH, I just did accuse someone of being an anti-semite. Here's two exerpts from posts:

"America needs to fix its moral compass and rethink whether
are not Israel, behaving like a spoiled kid with war toys is
strategically worth the headache. Our policy shouldn't be
written in stone that 'no matter what God's chosen people do
we'll abide by their decision'. Obviously not updating this
blind loyalty (or what I call being Israel's bitch) has already
cost us the World Trade Center."
and from another post:

"Its not bigoted to call a spade a spade. Its not ignorance to know that the Israelis did not have anyone at the World Trade Center because they knew it what was going to happen. WHENEVER the real story is told about 9/11 I hope we find out whetherthis 'ally' told anyone in the Whitehouse or State Department."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2726734&mesg_id=2726734

I would hope that the vast majority of us would condemn this for what it is: classic anti-semiticism.

Throwing out the anti-semitic label when it's uncalled for is repugnant. Not calling people on bigotry when it's in your face is a moral lapse.

[springhill]

17. Hmmmmmmmmm..........

I think our government knew about 9/11 and let it happen. Does that make me anti-American? Just curious. We can think a government is corrupt without condemning the people of a country, can't we?

[cali]

19. Can you read?

This poster accused the Israelis of not only knowing about the attack but being responsible for it. He/she went so far as to state that they warned Israelis to stay away. That's a lie of course, as Israelis died both on one of the planes and at the WTC.

If you can't see this for what it is: Plain old hate and bigotry, I pity you.

[springhill]

77. I've been reading your posts for the last three days........

And I have to say that you are just plain nasty to people. And you have the gall to criticize others.

[cali]

81. Yes I have the gall. This is a discussion board. n/t

[springhill]

89. You don't discuss..........

You lecture.

[chookie]

20. Criticism of Israel is not anti-Semitism

The passages you cite are indeed harsh and over the top. That being said, these sharp remarks are not levelled at Jews generally, but Israelis -- and not even ALL Israelis, but just the right-wing Likudists, who are presently in control of Israeli policy.

Anger at rightwing Likudists is NOT "classic anti-semitism," anymore than anger at Bush and Cheney et al is anti-Americanism.

It has even been suggested that anger at NeoConservative ideology is "anti-Semitic," that "NeoCon" is a ""code word for Jew." More nonsense! Declaring that anger at Richard Perle is only motivated by the fact that he is a Jew is as absurd as Freeper declarations that people oppose George Bush ONLY because he is a good Christian.

>>Not calling people on bigotry when its in your face is a moral lapse.<< Yes, but seeing bigotry where it does not exist, and insisting that one's own definitions of bigotry are infallible, is an intellectual mistake that distorts open discussion.

[cali]

21. This is classic textbook

bigotry. It's called blood libel. It has a long history. I suggest you read about it.

[robinlynne]

31. Thank-you Cali.

[chookie]

87. You're not serious -- oh, god, you are....

I just looked up "blood libel" as per your instructions in your cryptic laconic response.

" Blood libel against Jews
Blood libels against the Jews were a common form of anti-Semitism during the Middle Ages, though there is no ritual involving human blood in Jewish law or custom. Though the first recorded instance was in the writings of Apion, who claimed that the Jews sacrificed Greek victims in the Temple, there are no existent records of the blood libel against the Jews from that period until the legend surrounding William of Norwich in the 12th century, but the libel afterward became an increasingly common accusation. In many cases, anti-Semitic blood libels served as the basis for a blood libel cult, in which the alleged victim of human sacrifice was worshipped as a Christian martyr, but the claim has pre-Christian origins. Many Jews were killed as a result of false blood libels, which continued into the 20th century, with the Beilis Trial in Russia and the Kielce pogrom in Poland, and the persistence of blood libel stories in the Arab world."

I don't get it, Cali -- do you think that the crazy things Jews were accused of in the Middle Ages -- murdering children, poisoning wells, etc -- are EXACTLY the same thing as me seriously disagreeing with the policies expoused by Richard Perle, motivated by the same insane hatred?

Cali -- I don't think you even read my posts. If you do, which I doubt, you totally misinterpret them. You are determined to "discover" hidden messages of hate in my words. I suspect that you have already made up your mind that you want to find hatred of Jews everywhere. You don't WANT anyone to try to convince you that it is not, because it is a core belief that consumes and sustains you. I get the sense that you have a notion that every non-Jew has this tiny pod inside of them that they are born with, which inevitably causes them to incontrollably act violently towards Jews. This is not a rational idea -- it's a hoax as bizarre as the ones cited by the notion of "blood libel" against Jews.

Save this wild conspiracy stuff for the Aryan Brotherhood, Cali. Now there's a blood thirsty group of thugs that *really* hate Jews for irrational reasons and intends to do them harm. Count me out.

[Jim Sagle]

38. Saying Israel commited 9-11 IS antisemitic, and everybody goddamn well

knows it. If I see that kind of garbage on DU or anywhere I will call it what it is.

[KaptBunnyPants]

71. Do you come here for dialouge, or are you just here for the shouting?

So you see no difference between accusing a specific group of individuals who constitute a government of a specific act, and blanket hatred of all the people those individuals represent. I don't even believe that Israel committed 9/11, but I'll hear out the argument people make, not your supposition about what they "secretly" mean.

(Of course, that guy who thought all Israelis were in on it and skipped flying that day was an idiot, and certainly anti-Semitic)

[Jim Sagle]

78. I think we agree here.

[jonnyblitz]

24. I agree with you on those comments....BUT

nobody will pay attention when you point this out to them because the accusation of anti-semitism is being thrown around so much nobody is phased.

but yes I am glad you are calling attention to this. you find lots of this crap in the conspiracy milieu and sadly people on the left fall for it. a few others and myself have pointed out anti-semitic/neo-nazi sources used for conspiracy theories here at DU and basically we have been told to shut the fuck up about it because the info is so important it overrides the messenger. unbelievable.

that wtc comment especially is vile. :puke:

[cali]

43. Thanks, Johny

for seeing that this is unacceptable. It's heartening. Yes, people are throwing charges of anti-semitism out when not appropriate, but that's no excuse for not paying attention to bigotry when it's in your face.

[jonnyblitz]

48. it couldn't be any more blatant than the example you cite

but seriously I am not surprised others are clueless to what you pointed out based on my experience here at DU so far

[sendero]

85. I don't see what example one..

... has to do with example two.

I agree completely with example one, the MAIN reason the US is now caught up in the "terror" bullshit is our unbalanced and unconditional support of Israel. And we are approaching the problem the exact same way that Israel has for 3 decades (unfocused punitive attacks on people who had nothing to do with anything), and we are going to get a similar result (i.e. abject failure, creation of more terrorists).

Part two accuses Israel of actually carrying out the WTC attack, I've seen not a shred of evidence for that and in fact is it untrue that there were no Israelis at the WTC, so I consider it merely bullshit.

[ikri]

12. Somehow familiar...

Criticism of Bush is unpatriotic and unamerican.

Criticism of Israel is anti-semitic.

It's the same play, just different wording.

It is possible to be critical of someone without being racist, some people cannot see that however.

[helderheid]

15. Bravo, DA! One more thing - I don't understand why "some"

threads mentioning Israel and Palestine stay in GD while "others" are immediately moved to the forum created specifically for that subject. :shrug:

Recommended this thread!

[Hissyspit]

25. It is a complicated issue for the moderators, right now.

Israel + Lebanon does not automatically = Israel + Palestine (It doesn't equate technically geographically in the 20th-century sense). I say we should give them (and these are NEW moderators to a great extent) some slack.

[helderheid]

33. I know it's complicated but wouldn't it be easier on them to put all

of them there?

[High Plains]

37. No, I stay out of the ghetto, but I want to read about this war.

[helderheid]

49. In that case why move any of them? n/t

[Generic Other]

16. It's a lot like saying we're anti-American when we say we are anti-war

Hitting below the belt.

[helderheid]

18. perfect comparison

[stepnw1f]

103. Very Well Said (nt)

[matcom]

22. Aren't Arabs ALSO 'Semites'?

the ignorance of some is astounding

[Guy Fawkes]

26. Correct: Semite (defenition)

From Merriam-Webster:
"a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs"

[cali]

47. The ignorance of some is astonishing

it's not that big a deal but anti-semitism as a term, was coined to codify some nut's Jew hating philosophy. (Wilhem Marr, 1879) As I said upthread, it's a settled matter. All you have to do is a little research.

[rman]

95. The origin of the term "anti-semitism" does not mean that Arabs

are not also semites.

Nor does it contradict the fact that many of the most fanatic proponents of Israel's "right to exist" and the right to "defend" itself by any means, are non-semetic jews.

[Bonobo]

23. You are correct, BUT:

When someone talks about how "The US is CONTROLLED by Israel", I have to say the shoe probably fits.

The idea that a tiny country with no resources could be in control of the US is laughable -and people that think it are very,very close to saying that "the world is run by (rich) Jews" -which is an old and classic piece of anti-semitic propaganda (see "Protocols of Elders of Zion")

In other words, Anti-Israel screamers are not necessarily motivated by Anti-Semitism, but they MIGHT be.

Does anyone disagree with that? Or disagree that Jews are subjected to a hell of a lot of prejudice in the world?

[warrens]

27. I'm anti-Zionist and Likud, not anti-semitic

But that is the first tool of Zionists, to accuse anyone who dares to disagree with Israeli foreign policy of hating Jews.

[robinlynne]

30. I am a Jew and not a Zionist.

I doubt there are any Zionists here at DU.
When people here refer to the "Zionists", meaning Israel, or meaning people who defend Israel, I find it extremely offensive.

As a matter of fact, I spent an hour last night telling my boyfriend how awful it is to read the Lebanon-ISrael discussions here on Du, and how it reminds me of when I was 12, and went to an "American School" in Europe, and found out for the first time in my life what anti-semitism was in the raw. People wrote names on my locker and put a scorpion in, and I had never seen the word kike before and didn't know what it meant. I have not participated in any of the discussions, but believe me there is anti semitism going on. Israel is not a republican neocon. not even close.

[Bonobo]

36. The term "Zionist" already sounds anti-semitic to me!

I have only heard the term "Zionist" spit out like an insult from rabid, rhetoric spewing anti-semites.

Just sayin...

[High Plains]

39. Wrong. The term is widely used.

People who say things like that are part of the problem.

[Bonobo]

40. Oh yeah, show me.

Show me a reasonably neutral source that uses the term. While you're at it, read this. It might give you some insight.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Zionist

[High Plains]

79. Well, how about the World Zionist Organization?

Like this group of Israel-haters? http://www.wzo.org.il/en/default.asp

[NobleCynic]

56. The term does have a rather dark history behind it

And seperating the history of word from the word itself is a difficult if not impossible task.

[rman]

92. zionists call themselves zionists

just saying...

[treestar]

57. It is just like the right wing claiming you "hate" Bush just because

you disagree with him.

It's a false dilemma.

[robinlynne]

62. I do hate Bush.

I disagree with the democratic party.

big difference.
when people mention Zionism in the present context, it is out of dislike, not rational thinking.

[robinlynne]

68. Why are you calling people Zionists, while complaining that people

call you anti-semitic?
Don't you see the hypocrisy there?
That is why some people feel there is anti-semitism going on.

I support israel's right to exist and defend itself, and I also have empathy for the lebanese people. I'm not surprised Israel attacked. Are you? I don't believe they have evil motivations. I do believe pulling out of Gaza, and bombing only the airport runways, i.e. non-populated targets was a good thing, and I do not support bombing the people of Beirut. but when you (a generalized you) attack israel's motivations as "wanting war" and when you call supporters of Israel Zionists, you must know it is provocative. and incorrect.

[hyphenate]

28. I have attempted to stay away

from the fray as it were. I look at a lot of the disagreement in the Middle East as something beyond my reach of fully understanding, and I have disagreements with how it's been handled both historically and recently. It reminds me very much of other areas with civil wars and I just have difficulty in seeing how it's something very small that sparks unending wars and violence.

I still firmly believe that we're ALL people, human beings, and that if most people got it into their thick skulls that we're all flesh and blood and that most intolerance is based on nothing more than synaptic brain functions, we might all begin to get a glimmer of what our real problems are. But I'm afraid too much of the world is wired to respond emotionally than logically.

[Jara sang]

29. I haven't seen that much of it.

I was expecting to see it a lot.

[DistressedAmerican]

46. See 44 for one of many examples I have been so accused in recent days.

Despite the fact that i have proven track record that refutes bush attacks.

[Canuckistanian]

34. Hear hear!

While I haven't seen anyone actually call another poster an anti-semite, several have come pretty close to doing so.

C'mon, people, this is RW's favorite trick to deflect ANY criticism of Israel. Please stop using it here.

[Scurrilous]

35. If someone calls you an antisemite...

...hit the alert button. It's a violation of DU rules.

[mmonk]

41. It's become too easy and cheap to use. It gives someone

a feeling of moral supremacy to any debate. That's the sad part because there are real anti-semites out there.

[k_jerome]

42. to accuse Israel...

their leadership, military and citizens of deliberately targeting and slaughtering civilians or supporting such evil acts is anti-semitic.

[LostinVA]

51. How the heck is that "anti-semitic"???

No way it is. And, I DO accuse Israel and it's government and military of deliberately targeting and killing civilians... because that's what it's doing.

By your logic, criticizing the US government and the military of the same thing -- which is also actually happening -- would be anti american.

Total and complete BS. A statement like that has one purpose only: to shut down legitimate criticism of the Israeli government.

What they are currently doing are evil acts.

[NobleCynic]

53. What he might be implying is that

saying claiming Israel's motivation or sole purpose is to kill civilians is anti-semetic. If the killing of civilians is merely a result or by-product of other motivations, then it may be a different issue.

Likewise, we're not in Iraq for the express purpose of killing Iraqi civilians. We're there for the oil, and civilians get killed as side effect. It is not the primary motivation

What he may be saying is that declaring that to Israel the killing of Palestinian civilians is a desired end in of itself is anti-Semetic.

However, you may very well be right on the author's intentions, and I agree that such accusations often shut down legitimate debate and criticism.

[k_jerome]

63. read some stuff that white supremacists write and say...

according to them, they are not racist or anti-semitic. similarities abound to some things I read here.

[rman]

96. I don't care what white supremacists are saying.

[k_jerome]

97. i know. nt.

[rman]

99. You seem to care though. Why?

[k_jerome]

100. bigotry interests me. nt.

[k_jerome]

65. accusing large groups of people of deliberately slaughtering people...

is not criticism. you are equating Israel with nazi germany. what is there to debate with hitler? what compromises would hitler make?

[NobleCynic]

52. Yes, to accuse all of the above is ridiculous

Yet the implication your words seem to make is that questioning the motives of not just all but any of the above is anti-Semitic. Depending on interpretation, your statement could also be stretched to including anyone who questions any of either the actions or motives of the above. You have illustrated the thread originator's point perfectly by preemptively accusing anyone who questions Israel as anti-Semitic.

Regardless, there is little value in debating intentions. Results should be the primary concern. If one looks at the results of Israel's actions, there is a definite pattern of toleration among significant parts of the population in regards to large numbers of Palestinian civilian casualties. As seems to be the case regarding many Palestinians in regards towards Israeli civilian casualties.

[KaptBunnyPants]

70. You are wrong.

Whether they are deliberately killing these people or not, there is nothing anti-Semitic or racist in holding Israel accountable for its actions, and there is nothing anti-Semitic in thinking that a particular set of leaders would be willing to disregard other peoples lives. Israel is a state, which as an entity can be judged for its policies and actions, just like any other state. That has to be the most galling aspect of this "debate", the pro-Israeli side thinks that, as a Jewish state, they should be prejudged as morally impervious to the kinds of corruption and militarism which, from time to time, inflict all other states. This idea is so ridiculous and racist that it ought to be embarrassing to its supporters.

Imagine someone on DU arguing that people who thought Rumsfeld knew about Abu Graib were anti-American, merely on the grounds that its racist to think someone’s leadership would support an evil act. That’s the kind of argument Free Republic uses to squash any criticism of the Bush administration, and we rightly make fun of them for it. Israel has earned its criticism, you can’t tell me every country on the world except us is just being racist.

edit typo

[High Plains]

80. You are the problem the OP was referring to.

[DistressedAmerican]

44. Here's A Fine Example Of EXACTLY What I'm Talking About.

Just found this tacked on as the last post in a thread I started yesterday noting that the last incursion of this sort resulted in the formation of Hezbollah and that we could expect similar results this time around:

"So what exactly is your point?
Violence begets violence?

Thats not exactly rocket science.

That the Jews, oh I'm sorry, ISRAELI's should have not bothered going into Lebanon, to try and stop the rocket attacks and border incursion back in the 80's, just in case those attacking them reorganized into a terrorist organization with a name. Should they have sat back and allowed their citizens to be attacked? If they'd turned the other cheek until there was no one left, oh hurrah, no more need for the terrorists, no more war. Shame about the Jews right? but I guess nevermind...

Of course violence begets violence, but at some point after getting your nose punched in by your enemies, you have to punch back, if only to make them think longer and harder about doing it in the first place.

Yes it would be wonderful to get peace in the region, but its quite hard to negotiate peace with people who's major reasons for existance is to wipe the Jews and Israel off the earth.

I'm not going to argue with you over the semantics of vicious circles and violence begetting violence, but your OP is worded in an extremely inflammatory way, bordering, as so many posts on the DU in these times, on anti-semitic vitriol. Your OP comes extremely close to implying blame upon the Jews for everything wrong in that region, as if their very existence as Jews in the middle east is the problem. What a very 'Hezbollahish' stance that is. Rather than the fact that it is the Arabs refusal to negotiate a peace and co-exist with a Jewish state which is the problem. Its not impossible. Egypt has managed it. Jordan has pretty much managed it.
By far the more interesting question for you is, what would you do in such a situation? What is your point in 'throwing' such a gem out there?"

(note: This is not what prompted this OP. I just found it and thought it would make a fine example of what I'm referring to.)
==============================
I reject the pure and unadulterate attack on me and my character that this post represents. Assholes that spew these kind of hate-filled attack should not be allowed to continue to post at a site that supports progressive values.

I find these accusations reprehensible and the person that made them beyond contempt.

The language I actually have for this person would most certainly get me banned rather than he.

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

[Maiden England]

91. Firstly an apology

Everyone should know, I wrote that post, although the original was without bolded emphasis. I believe in owning up to my mistakes, learning from them and trying to right the wrongs I create. It was rightly deleted, I apologise wholeheartedly to DA for what I wrote, in what can only be described as a moment of mixed idiocy and anger.

Second, I'm going to *try* and add something intelligent to the debate, and Lord knows I have a lot of making up to do in that department:


This is a very inflammatory topic for all sides


Its not a good topic to post really vague points on, because there are people out there who are going to be as upset about the points made vaguely (even if they are not meant that way).

It sucks that we have to be careful about how we say certain things, but there is so much history of hate on both sides, its especially important to make sure the messages we are trying to convey don't get lost in a war of words and misunderstanding when the points we are trying to make are much more important. If it takes a little extra time and language to make sure we get the point across as we intend it, then its worth that effort.

However, I also think that it should be less acceptable for people to make truly anti-semitic comments, than it should be to call them out for doing so, and I'm afraid that it is becoming the case that the calling out is being more vilified than the anti-semitic post, and sometimes it's very appropriate to counter an obvious anti-semitic overtone (and in no way do I refer to your post at all).

It kind of seems to a casual reader as very easy to alert a post and have it deleted if someone accuses a poster of being anti-semitic in their comments, but its not as easy to get posts deleted which are being almost overtly anti-semitic as long as they don't mention the Jew word, which ultimately allows some discussions to get skewed in a very anti-semitic way. I have seen this on the DU over the past few days and it really concerns me.

[Name removed]

50. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[butterfly77]

55. If you even ask a question about the feud between the two parties...

they get highly upset and want to kill. This is why their is a problem now NO TALKING and the neocons and republicons think if they kill everyone we will be safe and this will teach them a lesson. They always come back for revenge all sides do.

[robinlynne]

64. who are they?

[MissWaverly]

58. Hooray for you DA from one of the slapped down

I didn't like being abused just because I think the current Israeli policy is a failed strategy

[DistressedAmerican]

59. Alerting Works!

These folks will only be allowed to pull that nonsense if the mods do not see the posts. I find they are usually quite responsive right now (see "deleted sub-thread" above).

Lot going on though.

[MissWaverly]

61. thanks, didn't think to use the alert

but will in the future

[Swamp Rat]

60. I'm tired of it too... and thank you mods.

Must be a difficult job to moderate right now. :hi:

[pyro858]

66. Most israeli's aren't semites anyway.

Anti-semite is just a distraction term. Works to doesn't it.

[Karenina]

74. European and American transplants

to Israel took their assumptions of superiority with them...

[cali]

76. Do try learning some history n/t

[rman]

93. History such as that of the role of russian jews in the creation

of Israel, and their domination of the power structure in Israel?

[nadinbrzezinski]

67. DA there are some who honestly are

those are few and far between and when I find them, I confront them. I don't need to use the terms either.

[Bretttido]

69. Amen!

I honestly can't wait for all this Israel / Lebanon crap to go away. Even if we could all agree on what the best course in the middle east is... then what? I'd rather focus on getting these republican liars out of office than let this issue divide us.

[Behind the Aegis]

72. use the alert.

If someone calls you an anti-Semite that is against the rules and an alertable offense. However, to call a post (article, writing, etc.) anti-Semitic, is NOT calling a person an anti-Semite! There is a difference!

There HAVE been anti-Semitic posts in the past few days. And, as you thank the mods for deleting personal attacks (calling a poster anti-Semitic), I thank them for locking threads based on anti-Semitic articles/writers and for axing posts that are blatantly anti-Semitic.

[jonnyblitz]

83. yup there have been those posts. that is why i get so mad when

people through that charge around too easily. One person here at DU who used a neo nazi source for her federal reserve conspiracy awhile back refused to admit it and kept attacking those of us who were pointing it out, she ended up getting tombstoned and she immediately signed on to another site and proceeded to bitch about the "zionists" that ran her off of DU. I hear she is still over at this "progressive" site spewing her illuminati, international jewish banker bullshit and they don't call her on it. this dumb ass also believes the protocols are true.

I am very critical of this latest situation going on with Israel BUT I will be the first one to get all up in somebody's face if they are spewing anti-semitic bullshit. the crap i saw today was pretty blatant.

[in_cog_ni_to]

82. I've had people admit to me they are anti-semitic. Someone on this board.

People who are anti-semitic (which I have NEVER accused anyone of being) will hide behind the "I'm just against Israel's policies" because it's an easy out and a ready-made excuse. Online, it's IMPOSSIBLE to know who the true anti-semites are. It's impossible to know who is here just to stir that anti-semite pot. I'm not saying everyone here who is anti-Israel is anti-semitic, but SOME are and will NEVER admit it. All I can do is fight them with words. I may "think" they are anti-semitic, but would never say that on DU and could never know because this is an internet board. They could be sitting there with Swatikas on their walls for all I know, but it's impossible to know.. I have been called a racist 3 times in the last week because of my support for Israel. SO? What's the difference here?:shrug: That's just as wrong, IMCPO.

[MsMagnificent]

84. "Revisionist" accusations too

have popped up when some don't like what was posted but have no real refutation except obfuscation and misdirection.

It all cheapens actual, viable charges.
Very sad :(

[NuttyFluffers]

90. i'm Anti-Smite myself. (for the slow: the 'e' was intentionally left out)

edit: for the really, really slow, it's meant to be 'smite' as in violence, a play on closeness on spelling. but let's see if someone overreacts still! :D

all we are saying is give peace a chance, aren't we lennon's ghost? :evilgrin:

[k_jerome]

101. isn't it true that those that make bigoted statements....

hate when they are called on it? the similarities between some things i have read here recently and pat buchanan are striking. would you consider him an anti-semite?