Current WAR CRIMES Israel - Hamas - Hezbollah - Houthis

[DapperDon]

https://www.timesofisrael.com/at-ri...prince-backs-iran-accuses-israel-of-genocide/

Zidane98 didn't you say The Saudis were backing Israel?

 

[jason_recliner]

Of course it is. Iran, Hezbollah, Houthis, Hamas. All openly declare their intent to wipe Israel off the face of the earth and / or annihilate Jews. All act on this desire too.

Just look at the state of Gaza on Oct 6 and the wealth Hamas had amassed off the back of Gazan people.

Keep defending mass murder of innocents - sorry, "war". I wonder what your boss would think of you.

 

[Jazny]

Let me know how many of these are anti-semitic in your mind

• Justifying antisemitic racist violence against a group of people based on the actions of some of those members of the group
• Rip trolling Jewish victims of terror
• Spreading race based propaganda about Ashkenazi Jews stealing babies and sticking to it despite not a single case of this ever being proven to be true
• Claims that some Jews don't belong in Israel due to their racial make up
• Claims and clear cut allusions that Jews control the media
• Claims that Jews use their history of persecution in order to commit atrocities against those that are less wealthy

^ And total complicit silence from regulars in this thread when face with clear cut antisemitism. Despite direct calls from me to denounce it. As antisemites simply stop arguing when confronted with facts, according to Sartre.

 

[JB1975]

It's the go to defense for ignoring the slaughter of Arabs, if you dare call it out you are against everying Jewish.

It's really disgusting how it's been weaponized.

It is morally decrepit to link criticism of the violence of a country such as Israel to one of the oldest and insidious hatreds in humanity.

The insult to people who abhor the slaughter of innocents is bad enough, but the perversion of the term is an insult to the memory of millions who suffered from that hatred in the past and an injustice to those who continue to suffer from it.

 

[Jazny]

Literally describes everyone on an internet forum.

No, there are times when it seems like it doesn't describe you. You do at least engage on facts at times. The main one is you do go sometimes quiet when you are confronted with an overwhelming argument, rather than acknowledge that I have a point. Sometimes you do, sometimes you don't.

 

[Jazny]

It is morally decrepit to link criticism of the violence of a country such as Israel to one of the oldest and insidious hatreds in humanity.

Can you give a single example of me doing that?

Watch him run away. Sartre in action coming up. The only possible thing he can do is run away or give an absurd reply.

 

[DapperDon]

• Justifying antisemitic racist violence against a group of people based on the actions of some of those members of the group
• Rip trolling Jewish victims of terror
• Spreading race based propaganda about Ashkenazi Jews stealing babies and sticking to it despite not a single case of this ever being proven to be true
• Claims that some Jews don't belong in Israel due to their racial make up
• Claims and clear cut allusions that Jews control the media
• Claims that Jews use their history of persecution in order to commit atrocities against those that are less wealthy

^ And total complicit silence from regulars in this thread when face with clear cut antisemitism. Despite direct calls from me to denounce it. As antisemites simply stop arguing when confronted with facts, according to Sartre.

There is just no helping you Jazny, you obviously care so little about Israeli neighbours that you'll even defend the worst of the worst.

Stop hiding behind false religious intolerance.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

• Justifying antisemitic racist violence against a group of people based on the actions of some of those members of the group
• Rip trolling Jewish victims of terror
• Spreading race based propaganda about Ashkenazi Jews stealing babies and sticking to it despite not a single case of this ever being proven to be true
• Claims that some Jews don't belong in Israel due to their racial make up
• Claims and clear cut allusions that Jews control the media
• Claims that Jews use their history of persecution in order to commit atrocities against those that are less wealthy

^ And total complicit silence from regulars in this thread when face with clear cut antisemitism. Despite direct calls from me to denounce it. As antisemites simply stop arguing when confronted with facts, according to Sartre.

Aren’t you claiming the Dutch anti-fascist Jews are a fringe group similar to Westboro?

Seems antisemitic according to your definition.

 

[DapperDon]

Can you give a single example of me doing that?

Watch him run away. Sartre in action coming up. The only possible thing he can do is run away or give an absurd reply.

Since when are examples needed? All we need to do is post out of context quotes

Like comparing Dutch Jewish groups to Westboro

 

[DapperDon]

Apologies for this anti-semitic tweet Jazny

 

[JB1975]

Can you give a single example of me doing that?

Watch him run away. Sartre in action coming up. The only possible thing he can do is run away or give an absurd reply.

You might have noticed that I'm not a 'regular' in this thread. I've just jumped in and will find my way soon enough, but I'm not yet comfortable in labelling people I don't know.

But for some reason you decided to assume that my post could only relate to you. The truth is that I've lived most of my life outside of this thread, and my reference to the weaponisation of antisemitism relates to the broader world. Sartre's quote does seem quite relevant to the present, as a way to consider the vilification of people on the basis of no reason at all.

Out of curiosity, I wonder if Jean-Paul thought people were 'anti-French' for opposing the occupation of Algeria.

With 'Sartre in action coming up', it seems that you're not as reluctant as me to make a gross assumption about someone you don't know.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Is Haaretz a Westboro Baptist Proxy?

 

[Jazny]

You might have noticed that I'm not a 'regular' in this thread. I've just jumped in and will find my way soon enough, but I'm not yet comfortable in labelling people I don't know.

But for some reason you decided to assume that my post could only relate to you. The truth is that I've lived most of my life outside of this thread, and my reference to the weaponisation of antisemitism relates to the broader world. Sartre's quote does seem quite relevant to the present, as a way to consider the vilification of people on the basis of no reason at all.

Out of curiosity, I wonder if Jean-Paul thought people were 'anti-French' for opposing the occupation of Algeria.

With 'Sartre in action coming up', it seems that you're not as reluctant as me to make a gross assumption about someone you don't know.

Nice meme. You weren't referring to me in your post, just musing randomly about other people labelling people antisemites in a reply chain where you started with this challenge:

If we're going to bandy terms like 'antisemitism' around, then surely we need a working definition.

It seems that the typical conflation of antisemitism and criticism of Israel is straight out of the madness of the IHRA definition.

But at least you seem to acknowledge you won't be able to find a single instance of me calling someone an antisemite due to legitimate criticism of Israel.

 

[JB1975]

Nice meme. You weren't referring to me in your post, just musing randomly about other people labelling people antisemites in a reply chain where you started with this challenge:

Well at least I can find some easy examples of you trying to distort the context of someone's post, in what I dare say is a show of bad faith.

I replied to your post because it included the quote from Sartre. In particular, I replied to the Sartre quote.

I can only hope this makes it clear for you.

But at least you seem to acknowledge you won't be able to find a single instance of me calling someone an antisemite due to legitimate criticism of Israel.

I 'seem to acknowledge'? Your use of Sartre's quote doesn't bode well, but if you tell me that you're someone who doesn't engage in the widespread practice of conflating criticism of Israel with antisemitism, then (as someone who just rolled into this thread) I have no reason not to believe you.

 

[Zidane98]

Keep defending mass murder of innocents - sorry, "war". I wonder what your boss would think of you.

Which is exactly what you have been doing constantly with regards to Hamas & co.

 

[JB1975]

Apologies for this anti-semitic tweet Jazny

Few people doubt the vileness of what Israel is doing to Gaza, but it still seems slightly shocking when the true nature of it is spoken aloud.

 

[DapperDon]

legitimate criticism of Israel.

Please share what you consider to be legitimate criticism of Israel

 

[DapperDon]

Few people doubt the vileness of what Israel is doing to Gaza, but it still seems slightly shocking when the true nature of it is spoken aloud.

The usual posters will ignore this the clam onto something posted later in the day and pretend this was never brought up.

It's the usual head in sand cycle of this thread

 

[JB1975]

The usual posters will ignore this the clam onto something posted later in the day and pretend this was never brought up.

It's the usual head in sand cycle of this thread

Francesca Albanese pointed out the other day that 'intent' is usually the hardest element to establish in any claim of genocide, but is surprisingly easy in the case of Israel.

But as the Australian Jewish Association says, Francesca and the UN are raving antisemites.

 

[faible]

This war, which continues to this day, serves only the interests of Hamas/Iran.

Also the Israeli Government. The one's doing a genocide.

Certainly not the Palestinian people being slaughtered and starved.

 

[faible]

The usual posters will ignore this the clam onto something posted later in the day and pretend this was never brought up.

It's the usual head in sand cycle of this thread

They'll also discredit AJ as a reporting source because Qatar.

 

[Jazny]

You might have noticed that I'm not a 'regular' in this thread. I've just jumped in and will find my way soon enough, but I'm not yet comfortable in labelling people I don't know.

But for some reason you decided to assume that my post could only relate to you. T

Maybe because you directly quoted me

With 'Sartre in action coming up', it seems that you're not as reluctant as me to make a gross assumption about someone you don't know.

I am making an assumption based on something I know to be true. That you wouldn't be able to find a single example of me labelling someone an antisemite becasuse they were legitimately criticising Israel. So you had two options that I could see. Make an absurd reply or not reply at all.

You chose a third option which I didn't see coming, which was to deny that you were not talking about me in a reply chain where everyone else was and which you had replied to me directly.

Here is DapperDon asking what is antisemitic in my mind. You added a 5th option to it implying that I think not wanting to see porgroms in the west bank every day is antisemitic.


Then you follow up with this:

If we're going to bandy terms like 'antisemitism' around, then surely we need a working definition.

It seems that the typical conflation of antisemitism and criticism of Israel is straight out of the madness of the IHRA definition.

Who else in this thread but me was bandying "terms like antisemitism around". If you're going to argue Sarte was bandying the term around.. he said it in 1944. What was happening around that time?

I appreciate you want to walk back your argument, but don't try and gaslight me that you weren't talking about me. What you did was you jumped into a thread and made an assumption without knowing what I was actually criticising. You couldn't support that assumption with anything real, so you walked it back trying to get yourself out of it by claiming you weren't talking about me.

I mean, I appreciate that you didn't try and justify the comment. I also appreciate you didn't deflect or walk away, but don't try and act like I am the crazy one for assuming you were talking about me when it's pretty obvious you were. And even if you weren't, it sure does looks like you were.

Also if you're as fair minded as you claim you are, go back and read some of the justifications/excuses for antisemitic attacks that have been put forward in this thread. If people say antisemitic stuff, I will call it antisemitic.

 

[JB1975]

You chose a third option which I didn't see coming, which was to deny that you were not talking about me in a reply chain where everyone else was and which you had replied to me directly.

** Or fabulously narcissistic?

'Oh yes but you were replying to me, to me! Me!'

I'll say it once more for posterity. The overwhelming bulk of your post was a quote from Jean-Paul Sartre, and it is that to which I directed my reply.

If you have anything new to add which doesn't relate to your need for attention, let me know.

 

[JB1975]

Here is DapperDon asking what is antisemitic in my mind. You added a 5th option to it implying that I think not wanting to see porgroms in the west bank every day is antisemitic.

**

I added to a list of things which are often conflated with antisemitism.

That list was not a list of the ways in which you have conflated criticism of Israel with antisemitism.

Ergo, my post to Dapper was adding another point for consideration, not another point of accusation.

Your defensiveness is interesting, and yet it also manages to be very boring.

 

[Jazny]

** Or fabulously narcissistic?

'Oh yes but you were replying to me, to me! Me!'

I'll say it once more for posterity. The overwhelming bulk of your post was a quote from Jean-Paul Sartre, and it is that to which I directed my reply.

If you have anything new to add which doesn't relate to your need for attention, let me know.

Uh huh.

Who was bandying the term antisemitism around then? "If we're going to bandy terms like 'antisemitism' around, then surely we need a working definition"

Sartre was bandying the term around in 1944 when antisemites were conducting the holocaust? Lol. No you were talking about me and if you weren't it surely looks like you were.

**

I added to a list of things which are often conflated with antisemitism.

That list was not a list of the ways in which you have conflated criticism of Israel with antisemitism.

Ergo, my post to Dapper was adding another point for consideration, not another point of accusation.

Your defensiveness is interesting, and yet it also manages to be very boring.

I will accept your explanation for this post that even though Dapper was asking me directly in an accusatory way, you may have in this case just been adding another point to his list without really directing it to me. It's possible.